The Colonization of California
This is a section of one chapter I am working on for the new book chapter I described above. You will probably find my explanation for the
colonization of California in 1769 a bit different, if not long winded.
The Founding of the Alta California Missions
In 1768 and 1769, Visitador General Jose de Galvez, a high ranking Spanish official with extensive powers to initiate reforms in Mexico, visited Baja
California, where he attempted to reform the mission system created by the Jesuits, and organized the expedition to occupy Alta California. Reports
that reached the royal government in Madrid of Russian activities in Alaska and Captain Cook?s explorations in Polynesia signaled a potential threat
to Spain?s Mexican colony from what appeared to be increasing interest in the Pacific Basin from colonial rivals. However, several closely related
events in the eighteenth century formed the backdrop to Galvez?s organization of the so-called ?Sacred Expedition? to California, and the
colonization of Alta California resulted primarily from the geopolitical concerns of the Spanish government.
The first event was the death in 1700 of the childless Hapsburg King Charles ll, and the ascension to the Spanish throne by Philip, the grandson of
French King Louis XlV. Several European countries including Great Britain challenged Phillip?s ascension to the throne in a conflict know as the War
of Spanish Succession (1701-1713), but at the end of the conflict the new Bourbon dynasty remained in power in Spain. The Bourbon kings of Spain
signed a formal alliance with France known as the Bourbon Family Compact, and joined France in several subsequent world wars: the War of Austrain
Succession (1742-1748) and the Seven Years War (1755-1763). Spain also fought a war with Great Britain over trade to Spain?s New World colonies known
as the War of Jenkin?s Ear (1739-1742).
The last two wars were the most important in terms of understanding the subsequent decision to colonize Alta California, and jumping ahead several
hundred miles beyond the northernmost Baja California mission. In 1741, during the War of Jenkins Ear, British Admiral Edward Vernon lead a joint
naval-army expedition to seize Cartagena de Indias, a fortified city located on the northern coast of what today is Colombia. Tropical disease
decimated Vernon?s forces, and the attack failed. However, the Spanish military learned the wrong lesson from the failed British attack on Cartagena.
Spain?s defensive strategy in the Caribbean emphasized the defense of ports by strong stone fortifications, and the failure at Cartagena in 1741
seemed to indicate that this strategy worked. Spain?s assumptions regarding the causes for the failure of the attack on Cartagena, however, gave Spain
a false sense of security based on the belief that the reliance on the stone forts at the major Caribbean ports protected the empire from attack.
Reliance on port fortifications proved to be illusionary in the next conflict, the Seven Years War (1755-1763), that was a true world war that spread
from North America to Europe, Africa, Asia, and other parts of the Americas including the Caribbean. Spain joined the conflict in support of France.
In 1762, British forces on opposite sides of the world launched almost simultaneous amphibious assaults to two Spanish colonial outposts, Havana in
Cuba and Manila in the Philippines. The British occupied both cities, but returned them at the end of the war. However, the fall of Havana and Manila
in 1762 showed that Spain?s reliance on port fortifications as a defensive strategy would not work, and that Great Britain posed the greatest threat
to Spain?s colonial empire. Seven years after the fall of Havana and Manila and following the receipt of reports of increased British activity in the
Pacific Basin, Galvez organized the expedition to occupy Alta California, and preempt a possible occupation of the region that could potentially serve
as a base of operations for attacks on Mexico, Spain?s richest colony. The outcome of the war and colonial realignments in North America also
heightened Spain?s growing concern over Great Britain?s rising power. Spain lost Florida to Great Britain, and acquired Louisiana from France as
compensation for the loss of Florida. Moreover, Great Britain acquired all French territory east of the Mississippi River, including Canada. Now Spain
had an extensive colonial boundary with British territory, and for the first time during peace Great Britain stationed large numbers of troops in
North America, including troops on the border with Spanish territory.
The pattern of establishment of the missions in California shows planning based on strategic concerns, rather than strictly religious motives. During
the first phase of colonization between 1769 and 1779, the government authorized the establishment of eight missions and three military garrisons in
California: San Diego (1769); San Carlos (1770); San Antonio and San Gabriel (1771); San Luis Obispo (1772); San Francisco (1776) and Santa Clara
(1777), and San Juan Capistrano (1776); San Diego Presidio (1769); Monterey Presidio (1770); and San Francisco Presidio (1776). The immediate goal was
to establish missions and military garrisons at the two known ports of San Diego and Monterey, and lay effective claim based on occupation. During the
first exploration by land of the newly colonized territory in 1769-1770, the Spanish encountered San Francisco Bay, which was a far superior harbor
than both San Diego and Monterey. Juan Bautista de Anza, the commander of Tubac Presidio in northern Sonora, brought colonists overland in 1776 to
establish a military garrison in San Francisco near the mouth of the harbor and a mission in 1776, and a town named San Jose and a mission at the
southern part of the Bay in the following year. The other four missions, San Antonio, San Luis Obispo, San Gabriel, and San Juan Capistrano reduced
the distance overland between Spanish settlements. The native uprising at San Diego in 1775 delayed the establishment of San Juan Capistrano by a
year.
The Alta California Missions in 1773 and 1774
Detailed reports from 1773 and 1774 recorded conditions at the newly established missions, four and five years respectively following the arrival of
the Spanish. There were five missions with combined populations of 494 in 1773 and 759 in the following year. San Carlos had the largest population in
both years at 184 and 244 respectively, as well as the largest number of baptisms. The missions building complexes were still largely comprised of
temporary structures built of wattle and daub or wood, roofed with tules or azotes, packed earth on top of a wooden roof, although the Franciscans had
also directed the construction of more permanent adobe structures. In 1774, for example, the Franciscans had had a new residence for themselves built
of adobe, along with several other adobe structures, and in 1773 had the foundations laid for a large adobe church that would replace the wattle and
daub structure still used in 1774. An adobe church, not yet roofed because of winter rains, already existed at San Luis Obispo mission, and an adobe
granary existed at San Antonio mission.
The mission agricultural and ranching economies were still only in the first stages of development. Agricultural production contributed to but did
not cover all of the food requirements of the missions, and San Luis Obispo, San Gabriel, and San Carlos produced the largest crops. In 1774, San
Gabriel produced 90 fanegas of wheat, 24o of corn, and 30 of frijol or pinto beans; San Luis Obispo produced 200, 80, and 3 respectively, and San
Carlos 125, 150, and 7. Ranching was also in the first stages of development, and the three northern missions still did not have flocks of sheep and
goats even though the Baja California missions had contributed hundreds of animals to the new missions. It is probable that the Franciscans had
decided to build up the flocks at the two southern missions, and then provide animals to the northern establishments.
All but one of the missions, San Luis Obispo, had been relocated following establishment. In the cases of San Diego and San Carlos, it was because
the Franciscans did not want to develop missions and resettle natives close to the soldiers of the military garrisons, whom the Franciscans feared
would corrupt the neophytes living on the missions. There had already been clashes at San Diego and San Gabriel between soldiers and natives,
provoked, in part, by sexual assaults by soldiers against native women. The relocation of San Antonio resulted from an inadequate supply of water at
the site initially chosen, and the same explanation was given for the relocation of San Gabriel.
The 1775 Attack on San Diego and its Aftermath: Limitations to the Franciscan Mission Program in California
?The enemy [Satan], envious and resentful, no doubt because the heathen in that territory were being taken away from him, and because the
missionaries, with their fervent zeal and apostolic labors, were steadily lessening his following, and little by little banishing heathenism from the
neighborhood of the port of San Diego, found a means to put a stop to these spiritual conquests.?
?There are vague rumors that there are 2 or 3 adults and the same number of children who, in the wake of the disturbance, have failed to report at the
Mission. When we find out for certain, steps will be taken to return them to the fold.?
?In view of the long exile which three members of this mission-Carlos, Luis, and Rafael-have endured for three years in the Presidio of Loreto,
following another period of somewhat similar length as prisoners in this Presidio of San Diego, I have wondered if, perhaps, justice itself does not
demand that an application for mercy should be made in their behalf. And since the poor fellows have no one but me to take such a step, and because
there is no one who desires their liberty more than I, their father, I make this application to Your Lordship with the greatest respect, begging you
for the love of God to take an interest in them, to pardon them, and to restore them to their country. I did not interfere to suggest that their guilt
may already have been blotted out in full by about six years of punishment which they have been enduring. This pertains to justice. My role is to make
a plea in the name of mercy. During the exile of these men, a number of petitions for amnesty have been circulated in the name of our lord the King,
and I do not know why no one intervened for them. They are but neophytes, and this circumstance ought to be enough to excite sympathy. They have
wives, who are not old, and they have children; and because of the hope I have had to keep alive in them that they would one day see their husbands
and fathers in their rancherias, they have continued to live the Christian life in the midst of relatives and associates who are pagans; and they have
recourse to the mission almost every time there is a Mass of obligation there.?
?Epidemics, God be thanked, we are free from at the moment; but we have had some. And persons from Lower California tell us that we have reason to
fear an outbreak of smallpox. Enemy raids are a threat that is always present, and we still suffer from the setbacks and shortages caused by the one
that took place six years ago. The barrenness of the ground is something that is evident and obvious to everyone. This was made clear to the
commandant general in the investigation in the year 1777 under the direction of Lieutenant Don Jose Francisco de Ortega. In it this land is described
as very barren, unproductive, lacking in all fruit, without humidity or irrigation; and planting is but a speculation made in the hope that the year
will be one of abundant rainfall. Hence it was proposed that because of the needs of this mission an allowance of one or two hundred fanegas of corn
should be made to it in the name of His Majesty the King, and that this should be brought on board the vessels of His Majesty which are employed in
the transport of supplies for these presidios?This shows how barren the region had proved to be from the time it was first settled until then. The
help received from the missions here, especially from that of San Gabriel, and the abundant rains in two our ot the last four years, have complicated
this action which was as sensible as it was necessary.?
In august of 1774, Luis Jayme, O.F.M. and Vicente Fuster, O.F.M., the missionaries in charge at San Diego, moved the mission six miles to a site in
what today is called Mission Valley. In moving the mission, the Franciscans hoped to escape what they perceived to be the corrupting influence of the
soldiers of the garrison, and to also be closer to the Indian villages they hoped to convert. For three years the pair had actively baptized Indians,
but their growing success in terms of the numbers baptized also would lead to a devastating Indian attack on the mission compound in November of 1775.
A report drafted prior to the destruction of the mission noted the construction of several buildings at the new site, including quarters for the
missionaries as well as a granary.
On the night of November 4-5, 1775, a large force of native warriors attacked and destroyed San Diego mission, and killed several at the mission
including Luis Jayme, O.F.M.. In the aftermath of the attack the survivors retreated back to the protection of the presidio, where they remained for
two years before returning to the valley site to rebuild the mission. An investigation of the insurrection provides important details on the
participants, and highlighted the tenuousness of the Spanish presence in Alta California.
In 1775, there were some 25 villages within a radius of 12 leagues (36 miles) of the mission and presidio, located north and south of the river and
also inland. The San Diego River formed the boundary line between the Tipai and the Ipai villages, and the leaders of the attack won support only
among 15 Tipai villages. Why did the Tipai destroy the mission? The Franciscan mission program posed a direct threat to the traditional way of life,
and in particular the native peoples felt greater insecurity once the Franciscans began to aggressively pursue new recruits after 1771, and relocated
the mission to be closer to native villages in 1775. Moreover, the Franciscans put neophytes to work in the fields at the mission, and this may have
played a role as well since the non-Christians may have feared being forced to labor in the fields. There has also been considerable friction between
the Indians and soldiers of the presidio, including rapes of Indian women and the destruction of indigenous food sources by Spanish livestock.
Spanish officials punished three leaders of the insurrection. As indicated in the quote at the beginning of this section, the three, identified as
neophytes, first spent nearly three years imprisoned in San Diego Presidio. Then, as punishment for their participation in the destruction of the
mission, the government sent them into exile at Loreto Presidio in Baja California. Lasuen petitioned for their return to San Diego in 1785, shortly
before leaving the mission to assume duties as interim president of the mission chain. While the Franciscan couched his appeal in the name of mercy,
his letter also expressed an attitude felt by missionary and Spanish official alike towards California Indians. The three were only neophytes, and by
insinuation really did not know what they had done or what they were doing. Lasuen also presented his appeal in terms of his assumed position of the
father to the child-like neophytes.
The Franciscans remained at the presidio for almost two years, and in the wake of the insurrection plans for further expansion in California had to be
put on hold. For example, the Franciscans abandoned the newly established San Juan Capistrano mission. During the summer of 1777, Junipero Serra,
O.F.M. came to San Diego to re-establish the mission at the site destroyed nearly two years earlier. Serra placed veteran missionary Fermin Francisco
de Lasuen, O.F.M. in charge of the restored mission.
Lasuen, a native of Alava in Cantabria, Spain, joined the order in Vitoria in 1751 at the age of fourteen. He left Spain in 1760, and arrived in
Mexico City in early 1761 where he was ordained to the priesthood. In 1768, he joined the Franciscans sent to replaced the recently expelled Jesuits
in Baja California, and was appointed to San Francisco de Borja mission. He was 32 years of age. Lasuen remained in the peninsula until 1773, and then
moved on to California. Why did Serra choose Lasuen to rebuild San Diego mission? One possible explanation may be Lasuen?s previous experience at San
Francisco de Borja mission in Baja California that, in some ways, paralleled the assignment to San Diego. In 1768, San Francisco de Borja mission had
existed for only six years, and there had been instances of Indian disturbances. Under his direction the mission program progressed well. Lasuen
continued to baptize numbers of new converts, and directed the reconstruction of the mission. Lasuen was also still a relatively young and vigorous
man of 41 when assigned to San Diego. He was an experienced missionary with a strong track record for success. The rebuilding of San Diego was also
important for the larger mission program, since the failure to do so might undermine government support for the California missions.
Lasuen faced a daunting task when he assumed charge of San Diego mission. The climate was not ideally suited to the Mediterranean style of agriculture
practiced by the Spanish. San Diego is still within the Pacific Coast Desert zone characterized by variable and at times sparse rainfall. The
limitations of agricultural production dictated a different approach to the administration of the mission, and particularly the implementation of
congregation. As was the case in the Baja California establishments further south, the bulk of the baptized Indians remained in their villages, and
only periodically visited the mission. San Diego only survived with help from the government and other missions in the region, specifically San
Gabriel. In the 1777 annual report, Lasuen commented on how the limitations of agricultural production affected the mission program.
With the aid of 13 or 14 fanegas of corn which we happen to have at the mission for the month of July, with 5 additional ones which they gave us for a
young bull, with the weekly ration which the presidio warehouse gives us, the Fathers, in the name of the King our sovereign (may God protect him),
and with 8 fanegas of damaged kidney beans which were given us as a stipend for a Mass-with these, up to the present, the following have been
maintained: the 5 Californians, the shepherds, the interpreters, the sick, the little boys of this mission rancheria, and some orphans who number, all
told, about 30, a number of little girls, and the workmen who have been needed for the activities mentioned in the section on building, and for other
essential jobs, for the cultivation of the land, and for sowing it. At the present time, thanks to the help of San Gabriel, all the people of this
rancheria are maintained.
In subsequent reports Lasuen enumerated the amount of support received from the other missions. In 1778, San Gabriel supplied San Diego with 103
fanegas of corn, as well as two fanegas of peas, three of beans, tomatoes, garlic, chiles, and onions. San Juan Capistrano supplied 12 fanegas of
wheat for sowing. San Luis Obispo supplied chick peas for planting. In exchange, Lasuen sent livestock to San Gabriel and San Luis Obispo. In the
following year San Gabriel and San Carlos made donations to San Diego. In other years San Gabriel, San Juan Capistrano, San Antonio, and San Carlos
all provided assistance to San Diego as needed. The first two named donated the most grain. In the 1781 annual report, Lasuen commented on whom the
mission could feed:
With this [assistance] it has been possible to maintain all the Indians, the men and women on the register at the mission, and they number 160 adults,
not counting the old men who ordinarily maintain themselves at the beaches, and who, when there is nothing there to trade, have recourse to the
mission kitchen. [It maintains in addition] the children of both classes who are old enough to eat. [It also maintains] certain individuals from the
outlying rancherias who come week by week almost as a rule according to their business or taste; also, adults who have been baptized (during the time
they are taking instruction), and all the sick and infirm who have sought refuge here.
The agricultural problem, caused by a reliance on limited and variable rainfall, persisted until the development of an effective irrigation system in
the early nineteenth-century.
The November 1775 attack left the building complex at the valley site of San Diego mission a smoldering ruin. A second task that Lasuen faced was the
reconstruction of the buildings, and the provision for adequate defense of the rebuilt mission. Each annual report recorded the construction of new
buildings, or the repair of existing structures under Lasuen?s direction. By the end of 1783, the building complex reached a stage of near completion.
According to the report for that year a large complex existed at San Diego that included an adobe church and sacristy, cemetery, granary, dormitories
for single women and men, and a soldiers barracks with a guardhouse. The church reportedly measured 30 varas in length (1 vara = .838 meters) on the
inside, roofed with reeds covered with packed mud. A small porch with wooden poles covered the front of the church. The buildings formed three wings,
and a wall enclosed the square, which made the complex easy to defend. Outside of the main quadrangle there was a tannery and several corrals. In
1783, two rooms in the southern wing completely rebuilt, and adjoining rooms remodeled with their walls being raised. A corridor with 11 pillars
added to the wing. A dormitory for vaqueros of wattle and daub had been built in the Valle de San Luis, one of the mission livestock ranches.
Not only was the rebuilt mission designed to be more easily defended, but it also incorporated specific defensive features. The same report noted
that the building complex also contained ?a ravelin with high mezzanine with a pathway to ascend to it, and with two doors[.]? Lasuen also designed
the adobe wall that formed the fourth side of the complex for defense. According to his description: ?As for the other side, a wall of adobe three
varas high encloses it, and at one extremity it ends in a ravelin on the same floor but, a little higher, and from this, and from the one already
mentioned, it is possible for the four corners to be defended.? The completed mission complex must have appeared fortress-like.
The final difficult task that Lasuen faced was reactivating the evangelization program in the San Diego area, and, as the quote at the beginning of
the chapter suggested, also bringing the apostates back into the fold. Lasuen and his assistant Juan Figuer baptized hundreds of Indians, both adults
and children, including more than 140 in 1777 alone. By 1784, the population that the Franciscans believed to be subject to the mission totaled 786.
However, this number is misleading, since most of the neophytes were under minimal control of the Franciscans still living in their villages. They
only came to the mission center itself periodically to receive religious instruction and to attend mass, and continued to feed themselves through
hunting and the collection of wild plant foods. The main reason for this dispersed population pattern, as described above, was the limitation of the
food supply. This pattern was similar to the pattern in the Baja California missions, while at the missions further north the missionaries were able
to support a larger proportion of the population at the mission center. On the other hand, the distant and limited supervision by and contact with the
missionaries at the main mission center probably also meant only a superficial level of religious conversion, and social-cultural evangelization.
Lasuen and Figuer set the mission program going again after the trauma of a major uprising.
[Edited on 12-20-2003 by academicanarchist]
[Edited on 12-20-2003 by academicanarchist]
|
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
