The Quarterly of the Texas State Historical Association, Volume 11, July 1907 - April, 1908 Page: 254
vii, 320 p. : maps ; 23 cm.View a full description of this periodical.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
254
Texas Historical Association Quarterly.
and 1692 in the main corroborates that of Jesus Maria, particu-
larly in the important matter of not including the Nasoni tribe
within the Hasinai.1
It so happens that after 1692 we get little intimate knowledge of
the Hasinai until 1715. When light again dawns there appear
in common usage one or two additions to Jesus Maria's list.
Whether they represent an oversight on his part or subsequent
accretions to the group we can not certainly say. Of those in his
list six, the Nabadacho, Neche, Nacogdoche, Nacachau, Nacono,
and Nabiti are mentioned under the same names by other writers.
Cacha6 is evidently Jesus Maria's name for the well known Hainai,
as will appear later, while the Nabiti seem to be San Denis's
Nabiri and may be Joutel's Noadiche (Nahordike). For the
Nechaui we can well afford to accept Jesus Maria's explicit state-
ment. Besides these nine, the Spaniards after 1716 always treated
as within the Hasinai group the Nasoni, Nadaco, and the Nacao.
Judging from the localities occupied and some other circumstances,
it is not altogether improbable that two of these may be old tribes
under new names, as seems to be clearly the case with the Hainai.
The Nasayaya, named by Jesus Maria, may answer to the Nasoni,
well known after 1716,2 and the Nabiti may possibly be the Nadaco,
also well known after that date. If both of these surmises be true,
we must add to Jesus Maria's list at least the Nacao, making ten
tribes in all; if not, there were at least eleven or twelve. Putting
first the best known and the most important, they were: the
Hainai, Nabedache, Nacogdoche, Nasoni, Nadaco, Neche, Nacono,
Nechaui, Nacao, and, perhaps, the Nabiti and the Nasayaya. This
is not intended as a definitive list of the Hasinai at any one time,
1See Joutel, in Margry, Dgcowvertes, III, 341, 344, et seq. (French's
version of Joutel's Journal, printed in the Historical Collections of
Louisiana, is very corrupt, and must be used with the greatest care);
Teran, Descripci6n, in Mem. de Nueva Espaia, XXVII, 48, et seq.
2The Nasayaya are placed by Jesus MarIa in a location corresponding
very closely to that later occupied by the Nasoni. Yet, the facts that
though Jesus Marfa named the Nasoni he did not include them in the
Hasinai group while he did include the Nasayaya, and that TerAn ex-
plicitly excludes the Nasoni from the Hasinai, make it seem probable that
the Nasoni and the Nasayaya were distinct. The strongest ground for
rejecting this conclusion is the fact that the latter tribe never appears
again under a recognizable name, unless they are the Nacaxe, who later
appear on the Sabine. The Nabiti might possibly be the Nadaco, but
this does not seem likely, for the locations do not correspond very closely,
while as late as 1715 San Denis gave the Nabiri and Nadoco as two
separate tribes.
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
Texas State Historical Association. The Quarterly of the Texas State Historical Association, Volume 11, July 1907 - April, 1908, periodical, 1908; Austin, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth101045/m1/258/: accessed April 25, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Texas State Historical Association.