Oñate and the Acoma War:

HISTORICAL FACTS

(excerpted from G. Hammond and A. Rey, Don Juan de Oñate, Colonizer of New Mexico, 1595-1628)

1. In 1598 the Acomas under Zutucapán wanted to start a war and exterminate the new Christian colony led by Oñate. The Acomas therefore invited a (prearranged) trading expedition up to the top of Sky City (December, 1598), ambushed the expedition, and murdered some 13 men (11 Spaniards, 2 servants).
         a. The unprovoked attack and subsequent murders caused the response of a declared war (January, 1599) in which Oñate himself was not permitted to participate. This was not merely a raid out for vengeance but rather a DECLARED WAR to defend the existence of the small Christian colony. Oñate’s instructions to Vicente de Zaldívar included the following:  “Make more use of clemency than severity if it should turn out that the Acomas have committed their crimes more from incapacity of reason than from malice…”

[ANALYSIS: The Spaniards did not want a war. The Christian colony of some 500 people was in no position to challenge the 40,000 to 60,000 or so Indians living in New Mexico. Acoma alone had more people than the new colony. But should Oñate have ignored the murders? Should the USA have ignored Pearl Harbor? Should we have ignored 9/11?]

1. The Acomas lost the war after three days of bloody fighting. Acoma men started killing their women and children so they wouldn’t be taken captive. The Spaniards put a stop to this Acoma slaughter of their own.
2. No one, not Oñate, not Zaldívar, not anyone in the 72-man army, was charged with “cruelty” or “genocide” or as a “war criminal” because of the three day war in 1599. Defense of the Christian colony was not considered a war crime.

[ANALYSIS:  The outcome of the Acoma War enabled the Christian colony to continue to exist.]

2. Despite their efforts to exterminate the Christian colony and waging aggressive warfare, the Acoma people were not exterminated. They are still there to this day. 

[ANALYSIS:  All wars are terrible atrocities but the Acoma War didn't involve inhumane acts as perpetrated by the English on the east coast or by Americans in the West such as Sand Creek or Camp Grant.

Oñate was not a "war criminal" merely because he had to defend his colony from attack. It is true that hundreds of Acoma men/warriors died in the war. That is what happens in war, even a war which Spaniards didn't want and didn’t start.]

3. PUNISHMENTS: 

1. No Acoma is given a death sentence.
2. Twenty-four warriors are sentenced to dismemberments.
3. Hammond and Rey have written that the 24 men each had a foot cut off and were sentenced to twenty years of servitude.
4. According to Dr. Eloy Gallegos, some twenty-four warriors were ordered to have puntas de pies, toes (not feet) cut off as punishment for murdering members of the original trading party and then plunging their people into war. According to Dr. Gallegos, who actually inspected the original document in the archives in Guadalajara, Mexico, this was the least severe punishment that could be effected under the law of that time.
5. According to Dr. John Kessell, the Vargas Project researchers never encountered the document verifying the dismemberment sentence was actually carried out.

HISTORICAL FACTS:  No one in New Mexico during that time ever reported seeing a footless Indian at Acoma or any where else in NM.

[ANALYSIS: Consider that some writers have stated that all Acomas had a foot cut off. Had this been anywhere close to the truth, many observers would have witnessed the spectacle of a village full of footless men.

Additionally, consider the logic:  would anyone sentence a person to 20 years of servitude but first you cut off his foot?

 HISTORICAL FACTS:  As barbaric as it seems today, dismemberments were part of the European legal system in those days. They were also practiced in the Americas. For example, the Pueblo people themselves had some of these atrocious practices. Unfaithful Pueblo women were sentenced to have their ears and nose cut off as punishment for their infidelity.]

4. In 1601 most of the people in the Christian colony deserted and fled south while Oñate was away exploring in Quivira. The deserters, who had signed a legal contract and had had all their expenses paid by Oñate, included friars, soldiers, and ordinary colonists. They knew desertion was a capital offense and understood they now had a death sentence over their heads.
[FACT: No one charged Oñate with “cruelty,” “genocide,” or with being a “war criminal” at this time.]

5. Oñate resigned the governorship of New Mexico in 1607. He was instructed to remain as governor until a replacement could be found.
[FACT: No one charged Oñate with “cruelty,” “genocide,” or with being a “war criminal” at this time.]

1. Oñate remained in New Mexico until around 1610 when new governor Pedro de Peralta arrived in New Mexico.
2. There is no mention anywhere of charges against Oñate. Indeed, when he arrived at Mexico City he was received as someone who had done a good job for King and Country.
3. The standard procedure for all ex-governors, the “residencia,” or investigation into his administration while in New Mexico, came out positive in all respects.

[FACT: No one charged Oñate with “cruelty,” “genocide,” or with being a “war criminal” at this time.]

HISTORICAL FACT: Oñate didn't leave New Mexico in chains. (Our State Historian made a serious mistake when he said this on the IN FOCUS program of July 31, 2008. The governor who left NM in chains was Bernardo López de Mendizábal in 1661.)

6. The deserters had to find a way to defend themselves because of their illegal behavior in abandoning New Mexico. Said deserters were able to convince the new Viceroy appointed in 1612, Diego Fernández de Cordoba, the Marquis of Guadalcázar, the authority in charge of the investigation as of 1613, that Oñate had broken the law while in New Mexico.
a. In 1614, some 15 years after the Acoma War and some 7 years after resigning the governorship and 4 years after being told he had done a good job as governor in New Mexico, thirty charges were brought against Oñate because of the efforts of deserters who had abandoned the NM colony during Oñate's absence in 1601.

ANALYSIS:  These deserters had a death sentence on their heads because they had broken their contract to colonize the region and Oñate had paid all of their expenses to settle in New Mexico. It was the deserters, whom Oñate referred to as his “bitter enemies,”  who demanded charges against Oñate.
a. The charge regarding the Acoma War of 1599 reads as follows:  “Juan de Zaldívar and soldiers punished the Acomas with great severity, injuring many innocent people and causing death of many natives and Oñate exercised the same severity with those taken alive in said pueblo.”
b. Oñate is adjudged guilty of twelve charges by the Viceroy.

7. 1617:  Oñate pays all fines and complies with all details of the conviction then he appeals the charges on the basis that they were made by his most bitter enemies who had illegally broken their contract and illegally abandoned the New Mexico colony.

1. In 1622 Oñate appeals to the new Spanish king, Philip IV.
2. In 1623 he is exonerated when the fine he had to pay was returned to him.
3. In 1624 he is made Mining Inspector for Spain.
4. In 1625(?) Oñate is knighted into  the Military Order of Santiago, proof that he was highly regarded by the Spanish government.
5. Oñate dies in 1626.

[ANALYSIS:  Oñate was a victim of political machinations waged by people who hated and feared him because they had broken their contract to colonize New Mexico and consequently had a death sentence over their heads.]

7. THE EQUESTRIAN bronze in El Paso is magnificent art. Like all art, it can represent whatever the viewer  sees in it. We see the Oñate statue as tremendous, monumental art which represents the founding of the Hispanic New Mexico and the Southwest by a European people who did not exterminate the Indians.

[ANALYSIS:  The controversy around Oñate is coming from people who don't know valid history but who are supported by the dominant society in order to neutralize the power Hispanic people have due to their numbers.

If you are incredulous, have you ever heard of Kit Carson being described as a “war criminal!” for waging a savage, scorched earth campaign against the Navajos and forcing them to a concentration camp at Bosque Redondo? Was his commanding General Carleton ever charged as a war criminal? Was his Commander-in-Chief President Lincoln? Have you ever heard even a discussion of the above, i.e., portraying Kit Carson as the embodiment of cruelty?

Such charges are reserved for Spanish New Mexicans so that, among other purposes, our congressional delegation can continue as it is now. As you are aware, there isn't a single Hispanic in the group (2008). The Oñate "controversy" is just another way to keep Hispanos off balance, confused as to their identity, miseducated so they can fight with each other, and out of the halls of power.]