The Coronado Expedition to Tierra Nueva: The 1540-1542 Route across the Southwest

19. Which Barrancas? Narrowing the Possibilities

DONALD J. BLAKESLEE 252 Introduction or the past several years, I have been reviewing the Texas portion of Coronado’s route. It is one of the two least understood segments of the route, the other being the segment from the Mexican border north to the Zuni pueblos. The reason for focusing on Texas is that, if we can resolve this most difficult section, we will have demonstrated the feasibility of tracing the whole. My effort has involved review of the primary documents, old maps and aerial photos, and accounts of later expeditions across the same region. It also has involved two field expeditions. The first, including Waldo, Mildred, and Wally Wedel and Jack Hughes, was funded by the Don and Sybil Harrington–Amarillo Area Foundation, while the second was supported by Wichita State University. The basic procedure I have tried to follow is to attempt to eliminate the wrong interpretations of the route and to see what is left at the end of the process. This is very different from trying to prove a single favored hypothesis and in the long run is far more effective. By reducing the number of reasonable alternatives, we can begin to look for concrete evidence for campsites and other evidence with reasonable hope for success. C H A P T E R 1 9 DONALD J. BLAKESLEE Which Barrancas? Narrowing the Possibilities 252 WHICH BARRANCAS? 253 There are two kinds of evidence to consider: textual and contextual. A good hypothesis must be consistent with the bulk of the primary texts. (None can be consistent with all of the documents, since they contradict one another in places.) Consistency with the records of other expeditions across the same region under similar circumstances is also important. A good hypothesis will also be consistent with other knowledge that is pertinent to the problem. This includes what is known of the physiography, geology, hydrology, botany, and archeology of the region. Each kind of evidence, that from the texts and that relating to contexts, provides criteria by which any hypothesis can be evaluated. I review both sets of criteria in turn before evaluating three hypotheses about the route. Consideration of the Routes Criteria or considerations that apply to texts include questions of transcription, translation, interpretation, the identity and purpose of the author, the nature of the audience he is addressing, and consistency with other texts. I would like to focus attention here on two points: the differences between translation and interpretation and considerations of audience. Both are critical to the task at hand. One problem of translation, among many, is Pedro de Castañeda’s mention of “uva morales y rosal” in the last barranca visited by the expedition (Castañeda 1596: 84r). The surviving copy of Castañeda’s account contains no punctuation, so it is not apparent whether he intended to indicate “uva,” “morales and “rosal” or, alternatively , “uva morales” and “rosal.” The former translates “grapes, mulberries, and roses”; the latter means “blackberries and roses.” Since I have found no references to blackberries in the region, I tend to favor the former translation. While the dividing line between direct translation and interpretation is a fuzzy one, translators sometimes go beyond what is obvious in the original to say something that fits their interpretation of the larger text. For instance, George Winship (1896: 237) translated the Spanish word, nueces, as “walnuts,” rather than as “nuts.” Both translations are technically correct, but which one did the author intend? Since the Coronado accounts include another reference to nueces in the vicinity of the United States–Mexico border, a spot where no walnuts grow, I prefer to interpret nueces as “nuts.” This issue is important to one of the hypotheses regarding the route discussed below. J. W. Williams (1959: 70) starts with Winship’s interpretation of nueces as “walnuts” and then proceeds to argue that since there were no walnuts in the canyons of the eastern Llano Estacado, the reference must have been to pecans! Turning to considerations of audience, it is important to keep in mind that the authors of all of the primary documents of the Coronado expedition were partici- DONALD J. BLAKESLEE 254 pants in the history-making journey writing for the benefit of their Spanish colleagues who did not participate. Unfortunately for us, none of the writers intended their reports to tell us how to follow the route they had taken. I have noticed several passages...