THOUGHTS ON THE ORIGIN AND AGE OF THE
MYSTERIOUS MONTEVIDEO INSCRIPTION
AND THE ROUTE THE 16TH CENTURY
SPANISH EXPLORERS MAY HAVE USED TO
DESCEND INTO GRAND CANYON
RAY KENNY, PH.D., PG
The MONTEVIDEO inscription (Figure 19-1) is located off the south rim at a place the Hopi might call
Tsakurshovi1. This lone rock inscription deserves close scrutiny because: (1) it is the only rock inscription in Grand Canyon
inscribed in a language other than English;2 (2) it was inscribed at the edge of a sheer cliff, is not a personal name and has no
date; and, (3) the lettering style is visually different from all other Grand Canyon rock inscriptions. Little information is
presently available with which to determine the age of the inscription. What we do know is that: (1) short-term weathering rate
cannot be used to estimate the inscription age; (2) the inscription does not translate well in Latin, Spanish or Portuguese; (3)
the inscription location was accessible via established Hopi/Havasupai trails; (4) 16th Century Spanish exploration at Grand
Canyon is poorly documented and is vague3; (5) 19th Century tourists were at the inscription site (although no written
documentation details the number of tourists that actually visited the inscription location); and, (6) the Spanish – very likely –
did not descend into the canyon near Desert View. 4
THOUGHTS ON THE INSCRIPTION
ORIGIN AND AGE
John C. Van Dyke5 reported seeing the
inscription during the early 1900s and wrote that
the inscription appeared “ancient.” However, in
recent years, Van Dyke’s classic literary work
The Desert has come under scrutiny by the late
Van Dyke scholar, Peter Wild. Wild and
Carmony6 suggested that The Desert was basically
a fictional novel. Wild later pointed out that Van
Dyke wrote The Desert from “an aesthetic, not
scientific point of view.” 7 Notably, Peter Wild
also praised Van Dyke for his Grand Canyon
(guidebook) work and stated that Van Dyke was
______
1 Hopi word meaning, “A place that comes to a point.”
2 Michael F. Anderson (noted Grand Canyon Historian), personal communication, 2012.
3 Some older published versions of Coronado’s journey are wrought with errors and inaccuracies.
Richard Flint and Shirley Cushing Flint, Documents of the Coronado Expedition, 1539-1542 (Dallas:
Southern Methodist Univeristy, 2005: 6-8. Document 29 of the 1596 Relación del Suceso is probably the
most accurate verions of the Spanish entrada into Grand Canyon.
4 Ray Kenny, “A 16th Century Spanish inscription in Grand Canyon? A hypothesis,” Park Science 27 (2)
(2010): 58-63.
5 John C. Van Dyke, The Grand Canyon of the Colorado: Recurrent studies in impressions and
appearances (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1920). Written as a guidebook.
6 Peter Wild and Neil Carmony, “The Trip not Taken” Journal of Arizona History 34 (1) (1993): 65-80.
7 Peter Wild, The Autobiography of John C. Van Dyke: A personal narrative of American Life 1861-1931
(Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1993). Readers of Van Dyke’s works have bestowed upon him a
false myth, but this does not diminish his literary skill.
Fig. 19-1. The MONTEVIDEO inscription (carved into the
Esplanade Sandstone, juxtaposed with lettering from a 16th
Century Spanish manuscript from the writings of Francisco
Lucas. The block letter samples (lower left are from SpanishRoman lettering; the lowercase letter samples (lower right) are
from Spanish Round Gothic style. Some of the engraved letters
(T & E in the word MONTE, and all the letters in
VIDEO) contain minor lichen colonies which may be
responsible for the more highly weathered portion of the
inscription. Ruler is 13cm in length. Photograph by Ray
Kenny.
“a meticulous historian” who “spent three
summers” scurrying “up and down its trails,
taking notes and making sketches” and that his
work was “as reliable as he could make it”.8
According to Wild, Van Dyke “took pains to
check his facts”9 and his historical descriptions10
in Grand Canyon were accurate. So the first clue
to suggest that the MONTEVIDEO inscription
is old comes from Van Dyke who stated in the
early 1900’s, “an ancient canyon-lover has named
[this viewpoint], Montevideo” (emphasis
added).11
The late Robert C. Euler12 cataloged the
inscription site in 1980 and stated that the
inscription was carved between 1880 and 1920.
His “judgemental” [sic] age determination was
based on the following criteria: (1) an old solderbottomed can13 was found in a sandstone crack
near the inscription; and, (2) the inscription style
“appeared” to be late 19th Century.14 Euler also
corresponded with a few scholars in an attempt
to obtain some additional insight into the
mysterious inscription. Written communication
from different scholars suggested that the
inscription may be Latin, Spanish, or Portuguese
– with one scholar suggesting it was Latin for “I
see the mountain”.15 MONTEVIDEO is a
compound word that in Latin may be parsed
thus: mons and montis (f), and visi and visus
(vb), which translate as “mountain” and “to see
or perceive,” respectively.16 However,
MONTEVIDEO cannot literally mean “I see the
mountain” in Latin17 because “mountain” is not
in the correct objective case.18 MONTEVIDEO,
as a compound word, is not found in the
complete Perseus Latin Dictionary19 but is found
in the Oxford Spanish Dictionary along with the
root words “mons” and “video”.20 Castilian
Spanish, like all the Romance languages, is
derived from Latin and the similarities between
the two languages are notable.21 However,
MONTEVIDEO does not translate well from
Latin, Spanish, or Portuguese. This may be
because: (1) “videō” (“I see”) was an old Spanish
verb that was in transition during the 16th
Century;22 (2) the Spanish verb “to see” has been
described as an historically aberrant and
______
8 Peter Wild, “Foreword” In The Grand Canyon of the Colorado: Recurrent studies in impressions and appearances (Salt Lake City:
University of Utah Press, 1992) vii-xxvii.
9 Ibid., xxvi.
10 Van Dyke’s description of the inscription location was notably accurate.
11 Van Dyke. The Grand Canyon of the Colorado.
12 Robert C. Euler was a former National Park Service anthropologist.
13 A solder-bottomed can is an artifact that is datable to the late 1880s.
14 Grand Canyon National Park archaeology files: B:15:103.
15 Ibid
16 Perseus Latin Dictionary Project (Boston, MA: Department of the Classics, Tufts University, under
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/) . URL (accessed November 4, 2011).
17 Dr. Monica Cyrino (Latin scholar), personal communication, 2011.
18 A counter-argument suggests that 19th Century tourists were well-educated, were well-trained in Latin, and would
have had plenty of time to carve the inscription. If true however, then why did someone from that time period use
the wrong objective case?
19 Perseus Latin Dictionary Project.
20 Oxford Spanish Dictionary (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 3rd Edition, 2003).
21 Paul M. Lloyd. From Latin to Spanish, vol. 1, Historical Phonology and Morphology of the Spanish Language. Memoirs of the
American Philosophical Society, vol. 173. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1987) 234-235, 296, 306-7.
22 Ibid
Fig. 19-1. The MONTEVIDEO inscription (carved into the
Esplanade Sandstone, juxtaposed with lettering from a 16th
Century Spanish manuscript from the writings of Francisco
Lucas. The block letter samples (lower left are from SpanishRoman lettering; the lowercase letter samples (lower right) are
from Spanish Round Gothic style. Some of the engraved letters
(T & E in the word MONTE, and all the letters in
VIDEO) contain minor lichen colonies which may be
responsible for the more highly weathered portion of the
inscription. Ruler is 13cm in length. Photograph by Ray
Kenny.
and problematic Old Spanish verb form; 23 and,
(3) spelling was far less standardized in the 1500s
relative to modern Spanish.24 Consideration and
recognition of this information may provide an
important clue toward understanding why the
inscription doesn’t translate well from Spanish.
Regarding 19th Century tourism: (1) Euler
noted that no artifacts - other than the one
“solder-bottomed can,” were found anywhere
near the inscription; (2) a small spring (the main
water source for a late 19th Century, primitive
tourist camp located on the Esplanade about 0.6
miles from the inscription), became nothing
more than an unusable seep after an earthquake
in 1900;25 (3) no other inscriptions have been
found in this area (despite apparent tourist
activity); and, (4) the relative percentage of
tourists that may have actually traveled to the
inscription overlook is unknown.26 Collectively,
this information might suggest that early tourism
at the overlook was minimal. Given that the
actual number of 19th Century tourists that may
have traveled to the inscription overlook is
unknown, any statistical estimates suggesting an
increased probability that the inscription was
carved by 19th Century tourists, is without
foundation.
PALEOGRAPHY
One scholar with whom Euler communicated felt
that the lettering style was similar to other 19th
Century, Grand Canyon inscriptions and wrote,
“the form of the letters suggest … the 19th
Century,” but his determination was based on a
“gut reaction”.27 Kenny28 suggested that the
inscription lettering resembles the distinctive
style of 16th Century Spanish lettering. Figure 191 shows a comparison of the inscription with the
16th Century, block lettering style of Francisco
______
23 Yakov Malkiel, “Paradigmatic resistance to sound change: The Old Spanish preterite forms vide, vido,” Language 36
(3) (1960): 281-346.
24 Richard Flint and Shirley Cushing Flint, Documents of the Coronado expedition, 1539-1542: “they were not familiar with His
Majesty, nor did they wish to be his subjects”. Edited, translated, and annotated by Richard Flint and Shirley Cushing
Flint. (Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 2005), 11-15.
25 Arizona State University, “Nature, Culture and History at the Grand Canyon: Sites and Stories: Rim to River and
trails,” http://grandcanyonhistory.clas.asu.edu/sites_rimtoriverandinnercanyon_southbasstrail.html. URL
(accessed December 12, 2011).
26 The main tourist camp at the end of the 19th Century was located at the Colorado River which was accessed via a
new 19th Century trail over a mile away from the inscription site. To date, no document has been found that
specifically delineates the number of 19th Century tourists that may have actually visited the promontory where the
MONTEVIDEO inscription is located. Additionally, the writings of George Wharton James suggest that 19 th
Century tourists were led to another promontory well east of the inscription promontory (George Wharton James,
In and Around the Grand Canyon. Boston: Little Brown and Company, 1913: 147-159). Presently, the only indicator
that any 19th Century tourists were at the inscription promontory comes from the fact that one solder-bottomed
can (datable to the 1880s) was found in a nearby sandstone crack (Grand Canyon National Park archaeology files:
B:15:1030).
27 Grand Canyon National Park archaeology files: B:15:103.
28 Ray Kenny, “A 16th Century Spanish inscription in Grand Canyon? A hypothesis.”
Fig. 19-2. Block lettering in the Stairwell Mural, 16th Century
Spanish Monastery (Convento de San Nicolas de Tolentino),
Actopan, Mexico. Photograph Actopan-09812_009 (1995)
by Dr. James Bartholomay Kiracofe, Director, Inter-American
Institute for Advanced Studies in Cultural History (used by
permission).
used to show that 19th Century writing styles were
quite variable (i.e., there is no diagnostic 19th
Century style); the writing style at Autograph
Rock varies from pedestrian block lettering to
finical cursive. While some generalizations about
19th Century inscriptions can be made, there will
likely never be complete agreement with respect to
paleography.33 What we can glean from the large
number of 19th Century inscriptions at
Autograph Rock is that the inscribers
characteristically carved a date with their name;
this characteristic also holds true for the (far
fewer) 19th Century inscriptions found at Grand
Canyon (Figure 19-5). Consequently, based on
the statistically significant Autograph Rock and
Grand Canyon inscription data base, the majority
of 19th Century inscriptions appear to have dates
accompanying personal names; the
MONTEVIDEO inscription has no date, nor is
it a person’s name.
Lucas.29 The inscription letters also strongly
resemble lettering30 on murals which adorn the
interior walls and ceilings of 16th Century Spanish
monasteries in Mexico (Figures 19-2 and 19-3),
and similarly resemble a rare surviving scroll used
by Friars in 16th Century colonial Mexico (Figure
19-4).31 For comparative purposes, examples of
19th Century Grand Canyon inscriptions are
shown in figure 19-5.
In the late 1990’s, the author did a study of
the 323 (mostly 19th/20th Century) sandstone rock
inscriptions at Autograph Rock, Oklahoma.32
The study was undertaken primarily to determine
why some of the inscriptions were badly
weathered while others appeared well-preserved.
Coincidentally, the data from this study can be
Fig. 19-3. Block lettering in the 16th Century Monastery
(Convento de Los Reyes Santos), Metztitlan, Mexico.
Photograph Metzti 09607_092 by Dr. James Bartholomay
Kiracofe (used by permission).
______
29 Frank Chouteau Brown, “The Project Gutenberg e-book of letters and lettering: A treatise with 200 examples”
(Boston: Bates and Guild) http://www.gutenberg.org/files/20590/. URL (accessed November 3, 2011).
30 This is not meant to imply that all 16th Century lettering resembles the rock inscription lettering. However, 16 th
Century printers gave “considerable thought to the shape of letters” and letters were seen as “part of a Christian,
civilizing program.” In this regard, 16th Century lettering style is characterized by notable consistency. Laurence de
Looze, The Renaissance Letter and the encounter with the “New World”, Ameriquest 5 (2008): 2-6.
31 Jaime Lara, Christian texts for Aztecs: Art and Liturgy in Colonial Mexico ( Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame
Press, 2008).
32 Autograph Rock, OK was an important stop along the Historic Santa Fe Trail. Ray Kenny, The geology of Autograph
Rock, Cimarron County, Oklahoma (Santa Fe, NM: NPS Intermountain Support Office, unpublished National Park
Service Resource Management Report, 2000).
33 Dr. Joseph Sanchez (Paleographer and Historian), personal communication, 2010.
show: (1) no observable change for hundreds of
years; (2) a perceptible, localized change due to
some site specific physical, chemical, biological,
or microclimatic event or condition; and/or, (3) a
remarkable change due to a short-lived,
catastrophic event. Owing to this inherent
natural variability, weathering rate over a
geologically short time period (i.e., hundreds of
years) is not a reliable predictor of an average or
temporally uniform weathering rate. Therefore,
the use of comparative photography to establish
a short-term weathering rate will likely yield an
erroneous weathering rate estimate.
Fig. 19-4. Rhetorica Christiana (1579), a rare surviving
example of a 16th Century Catholic scroll; the block lettering
style is also remarkably similar to the lettering style of the
MONTEVIDEO inscription. University of Notre Dame
Press (used by permission).
ROCK INSCRIPTION WEATHERING RATE
CONSIDERATIONS
Weathering rate in geomorphology34 is generally
averaged over a thousand years (or more). This is
done because weathering rate is episodic,
temporally and spatially variable, and the longterm intensity and character of the responsible
processes is largely unknown; averaging over
long time periods will smooth out natural, shortterm variability. Accordingly, short-term changes
are not indicative - nor predictive – of uniform
weathering rates. Basically, an outcrop,
petroglyph (Figure 19-6), or rock inscription may
Fig. 19-5. Examples of 19th and 20th Century rock
inscriptions from Grand Canyon (Philips, 1904; Case, 1905;
Kislingbury, 1889). Inscription photographs (“Philips” and
“Case”) courtesy of Michael F. Anderson (used by permission).
______
34 A sub-discipline of Geology which focuses on the study of Earth surface processes (including rate) and landform
development.
Kenny35 and Kenny and Lancour36 showed that
the remarkable difference in the degree of rock
weathering observed at Autograph Rock, OK37
was likely due to different microclimatic
conditions, microfractures and sedimentary
structures in the sandstone, and the presence of
lichen. Lichen colonies are significant because
they release corrosive organic acids (which
dissolve the sandstone cement), and have
subsurface structures (e.g., fungal hyphae) that
penetrate into the rock substrate (physically
prying out sand grains), which ultimately results
in accelerated degradation of the inscription. Some
of the more highly weathered letters in the
MONTEVIDEO inscription are also populated
by minor lichen colonies (Figure 19-1). The
presence of even minor lichen colonies should
produce an apparent increase in short-term
weathering rate (conceivably, this is why a few of
the letters appear more weathered). What
remains unknown is: (1) the length of time the
lichen colonies have been impacting the
inscription; and, (2) whether the size of the lichen
colonies has changed through time. Without this
critical temporal data, it would be ill-advised to
suggest that an accurate weathering rate can be
deduced or inferred from localized, licheninduced changes to some of the inscription
letters. Indeed, we do not even know if all of the
inscription letters were initially carved to a
uniform depth.
Could the MONTEVIDEO inscription
survive 470+ years of subaerial exposure and
weathering? Based on nearby Puebloan
petroglyphs (Figure 19-7), the answer is yes.
These nearby petroglyphs are believed to have
been carved between 1150 and 1300 AD, are
approximately four linear miles from the
inscription, are remarkably well-preserved, and
would have been impacted by weathering
conditions similar to those that occurred at the
MONTEVIDEO inscription.38
Fig. 19-6. A well-developed petroglyph panel, carved into
calcareous sandstone (southeastern Utah), illustrates the
spatially inconsistent nature and short-term unpredictability of
weathering. These petroglyphs are believed to have been created
by ancestral Puebloans between AD 1100 and 1600. Note
that these much-older petroglyphs are still well-preserved
and that some areas show no observable change from weathering
while others show highly visible, localized changes due to some
site specific event (e.g. rock spall along the right). Any attempt
to obtain an average, or uniform, short-term weathering rate
would produce an inaccurate estimate because of the natural
variability of the weathering processes. Photograph by Ray
Kenny.
Fig. 19-7. Grand Canyon petroglyphs believed to have been
carved between 1150 and 1300 AD, and are about four
linear miles from the MONTEVIDEO inscription.
Photograph courtesy of Michael F. Anderson.
______
35 Kenny, The geology of Autograph Rock.
36 Kenny, Ray and Heather Lancour, Petrography and permeability of the Mesa Rica Sandstone at Autograph Rock, Oklahoma.
Geological Society of America, 53rd Rocky Mountain Section Meeting (Albuquerque: April 29-May 2, 2001).
37 Remarkable changes in the weathered condition of rock inscriptions were present even within centimeters of each
other. Kenny, The geology of Autograph Rock.
38 The ancient puebloan petroglyphs are also carved in sandstone and are on a gently-sloping to flat surface.
THE SPANISH ENTRADA INTO GRAND
CANYON
The exact location where Don Garcia Lopez de
Cárdenas and his 12 men first saw Grand Canyon
“is not known”.39 The location of the first
entrada into Grand Canyon was described as a
place along the south rim which was, "elevated
and full of low twisted pines … and lying open
toward the north”.40, 41,42 Historians have
suggested, based on this meager information and
the presence of ancient Hopi trails, that
Coronado’s men first viewed Grand Canyon near
Desert View.43, 44, 45, 46 From Coronado’s journal
we learn that the Spaniards, spent several days
looking for a passage off the rim before an
attempt was made to go down at the least
difficult place. Three Spaniards attempted a
descent but “returned … not having succeeded
in reaching the bottom” but said that they had
been down “about a third of the way” (emphasis
added) and could “see the river” from where they
stopped.47 Hence, the Spaniards were only able
to travel about a third of the way down before
they were unable to travel any farther.48 On none
of the trails in the Desert View area (which were
established Hopi trails), is there a logical,
topographically-constrained stopping point about
a third of the way down that would force the
Spaniards to go no farther.49 Additionally, the
Hopi would most likely not have taken the
“invaders” on trails that would lead to their most
sacred religious site (the Sipapu).50 The modern
Hopi – with only extremely rare exceptions, do
not take any pahanas51 to their sacred sites or
religious ceremonies. Indeed, it has been said, “of
all the traits that stamp Puebloan Culture, secrecy
is the hallmark”.52
The MONTEVIDEO inscription is found
along an ancient, established Hopi/Havasupai
trail that descended off the south rim - a trail
over which the Hopi habitually traveled several
______
39 J. Donald Hughes, In the House of Stone and Light. (Grand Canyon, Arizona: Grand Canyon Natural History
Association, 1978), 20.
40 Herbert Eugene Bolton, Coronado, knight of pueblos and plains. (New York: Whittlesey House, 1949), 139-140.
41 George P. Hammond and Agapito Rey. Narratives of the Coronado Expedition, 1540-1542 (Albuquerque, NM:
University of New Mexico Press, 1940).
42 Francisco Vasquez de Coronado, The journey of Coronado, 1540-1542, from the city of Mexico to the Grand Canon of the
Colorado and Buffalo Plains of Texas, Kansas, and Nebraska. [Translated by George Parker Winship, 1892] (Whitefish,
Montana: Kessinger, 2007), 86.
43 Katharine Bartlett, “How Don Pedro de Tovar discovered the Hopi and Don Garcia Lopez de Cardenas saw the
Grand Canyon, with notes upon their probable route,” Plateau 12 (1940) 37-45.
44 Harry C. James, Pages from Hopi History (Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1974).
45 Todd R. Berger, It happened at Grand Canyon (Guilford, CT: Morris Book Publishers, Globe Pequot Press, 2007), 3.
46 Rudy J. Gerber, The Railroad and the Canyon (Gretna, LA: Pelican Publishing, 1995), 16.
47 It was reported in Document 29 of the 1596 Relación del Suceso, that the Spaniards could see the river from where
they stopped, which could perhaps suggest that the river was not visible from the rim location where they started
their descent. The Spaniards stopped at a location that was “so vertical … that they could hardly see the river” and
searched the area with “utmost diligence” for a way down but it was “vertical and rocky” and “none was found”. Recall
that the MONTEVIDEO inscription was carved on a flat surface at the edge of a vertical cliff. Flint and Flint,
Documents of the Coronado expedition, 499.
48 Ibid.
49 Kenny, “A 16th Century Spanish inscription in Grand Canyon? A hypothesis,” 58-63. Additionally, we learn from
Document 29 of the Relación del Suceso that after the Spaniards climbed back out of the canyon, they left the
“descent” location due to a lack of water, and returned to a location where they had found water; at the location they
returned to, the river was “coming from the northeast and turned to the south-southwest” (which could describe
the Colorado River’s course viewed from the Desert View area). This description strongly supports an
interpretation that the Spanish descent off the south rim was west of the Desert View area. Flint and Flint,
Documents of the Coronado expedition, 1539-1542, 498-499.
50 In a tributary to the Colorado River, just north of the Desert View area.
51 “Pahana” refers to non-Hopi or white people.
52 David Roberts, The Pueblo Revolt: The secret rebellion that drove the Spaniards out of the Southwest. (New York: Simon and
Schuster, 2005), 152.
times a year.53 George Wharton James54 also
wrote that one of the routes that the Spaniards
may have used to descend into Grand Canyon is
the same Hopi/Havasupai trail that could have
led them directly toward the inscription location.
If the Spaniards were led to this trail and took a
direct 55 route out to the promontory, then they
could have ended up at the inscription location.
Further, we do not know if the Spaniards
descended off the rim by themselves or were led
down the trail by Hopi guides.
Was this south rim location the place where
the 16th Century Spanish explorers first
attempted to descend into the canyon? It is
certainly possible.
Flint and Flint56 have demonstrated that 16th
Century distances were remarkably accurate57
when compared to modern, straight-line map
mileage. 16th Century distances were recorded
using leagues,58 and the Spaniards “traveled 50
leagues [~130 miles] … towards the west” from the
Hopi Villages, led by “native guides”.59 This puts
the Spaniard’s location west of the Desert View
area.60
Assuming the Spaniards departed from the
Hopi village of Awatovi,61 50 leagues (~130
miles) of travel would place them at the south
rim location of the Hopi/Havasupai trail that
leads off the rim toward the MONTEVIDEO
______
53 George Wharton James, The Grand Canyon of Arizona: How to see it (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1910)
http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/2394/pg2394.html. URL (accessed November 4, 2011), 197-199.
54 Ibid., 197-199
55 A direct route out to the nearest promontory would also be compatible with a “Euro-centric” perspective of
finding the shortest and quickest route to a destination.
56 Flint and Flint, Documents of the Coronado expedition, 11, 494-95.
57 Ibid., 494 ( footnote #5 therein)
58 16th Century distances in 1596 Relación del Suceso (Document 29) were recorded using “legua legal” measure (the
“Judicial” Spanish League, aka, the old “leagues” of Burgos) where, 1 league ≈ 2.6 miles. This is an important point
because a “league” was not always the same unit of measure. The author of the Relación del Suceso is not known
(it was not written by Pedro de Casteñada de Nájera who transcribed most of Coronado’s journal years after the
journey, but, according to the Flints, it was likely written by someone who was directly involved in processing
Coronado’s communications, such as Coronado’s secretary, Hernando Bermejo). The author of the Relación,
more than with any other document from Coronado’s expedition, paid considerable attention to distances and
latitude measurement. Flint and Flint, Documents of the Coronado expedition, 494-95.
59 Ibid., 498-499.
60 The Desert View area would be approximately 88 linear miles from Awatovi, not the 130 linear miles the Spaniards
had traveled to descend off the south rim, as recorded in the Relación del Suceso (assuming the reported distances
are correct and there is no reason to assume otherwise).
61 Don Garcia Lopez de Cárdenas led his 12 men, 30 leagues from Cibola (the ancient Zuni Pueblo of Hawikuh) to a
Hopi village. Using the straight-line map mileage method of Flint and Flint (2005), this would place the Spaniards
near/at the Hopi Village of Awatovi which was known to have been occupied by the 16 th Century Spanish
Conquistadors. “Coronado’s lieutenant, came from Zuni … he and his soldiers came to Awatovi.” George
Wharton James, Arizona The Wonderland. (Boston, Page Co., 1917), 94.
inscription (~127 straight-line map measure
miles).62 Given that these mileage estimates place
the Spaniards at the Hopi/Havasupai trail
location, it lends further credence to the
suggestion that the MONTEVIDEO inscription
may have been carved by the Spaniards.
Additionally, it is unlikely that the Hopi
would have led the Spaniards any farther west
than this location because they would have been
taking the “invaders” too close to the Havasupais
with whom they were close friends.63
CARVING THE MONTEVIDEO
INSCRIPTION
Assuming for a moment that one (or more) of
the Spaniards did carve the MONTEVIDEO
inscription, would there have been sufficient time
to travel from the rim, down the established
Hopi/Havasupai trail, out to the promontory,
carve the inscription, and return to the rim in one
day? Travel time would not have been an issue;
the author has hiked from the rim to the
inscription site and back up to the rim in a few
hours. But it is an open question whether or not
there would have been enough time to carve the
inscription. In an effort to address this question:
(1) a representative sample of the upper unit of
the Esplanade Sandstone sample was collected;
(2) a new inscription was carved; and, (3) the
time to carve the inscription was recorded and
documented.64 It should be noted that the
upper unit of the Esplanade Sandstone is
calcareous sandstone.65 Calcareous sandstone can
be more easily carved by hard utensils – such as
the steel swords the Spaniards likely carried with
them into the canyon. The replicated inscription
was carved without any power tools; a steel
blade, hammer stone, and one shoeing nail were
employed.66 Additionally, a reasonable effort was
made to duplicate the size and depth (~ 0.5 cm)
of the ancient inscription.67 Ultimately it took
slightly more than an hour to carve the word
“MONTE” (Figure 19-8). Even if the inscription
was carved by one person,68 then there would
______
62 The straight-line map measure from the Hopi village of Awatovi to the Hopi/Havasupai trail that leads off the rim
towards the MONTEVIDEO inscription is approximately 127 miles, which is remarkably close to the 130 miles
recorded as the distance traveled by the Spaniards. This distance was determined using Google Maps® to avoid any
bias. It should be noted that a few “bends” were used in the otherwise straight-line map measure to avoid an
impossible linear trajectory over part of the Grand Canyon proper; a direct line yields a distance of about 121 miles
which is still within the 10% error range established by Flint and Flint (2005). It should also be noted that the
scriber of the Relación del Suceso only reported distances to the nearest 5 leagues. Flint and Flint, Documents of the
Coronado expedition, 1539-1542, 690.
63 The Hopi and Havasupai were close friends and traded valuable goods (including buckskin and red ochre used for
Hopi ceremonial purposes). In fact, the Hopi have a “Havasupai” kachina (Konin, Cohonino or Kohonina) which
represents the spirit of their friends (kachinas are an important part of Hopi religious ceremonies). Alexander M.
Stephen, Hopi Journal of Alexander M. Stephen. Edited by Elsie C. Parsons. (New York: Columbia University
Contributions to Anthropology 23.)
64 A mobile device (cell phone) was used to document the time it took to carve a replica of the MONTEVIDEO
inscription; start and end times were photographed showing the date and respective times.
65 Calcareous sandstone basically means that the sand grains in the rock are (in part) cemented together by the
comparatively soft mineral, calcite.
66 A shoeing nail was selected as one of the carving tools because it would have been similar to the diagnostic “carethead” shoeing nail artifacts found all along the ancient travel routes of Coronado’s expedition and may have been a
“tool” the Spaniards could have carried with them. In fact, the shoeing nail worked so well for carving the
inscription replica – especially the head of the nail, it became the principal tool that was used.
67 The original depth of the inscription letters is not known.
68 There is no a priori reason to suggest that only one person carved the MONTEVIDEO inscription. Indeed, there is
some suggestion of unequal spacing between the first part of the compound word “MONTE” and the latter part of
the compound word “VIDEO”.
Fig. 19-8. Replica of a part of the MONTEVIDEO
inscription (upper part of the figure) compared to the authentic
rock inscription (lower part of the figure). Mobile device is
11.5cm in length; ruler is 13cm.]
have been ample time to travel to the
promontory, scout the area around the nearvertical cliffs, note that there were no obvious
routes to descend off the steep cliffs, carve the
inscription, and return to the rim in one day.
A CLUE TO THE MEANING OF THE
INSCRIPTION
Why did someone take the time to carve an
inscription that is not their given or family name,
has no date, and focuses on “a mountain” in the
heart of Grand Canyon?
Hubert Howe Bancroft reviewed Coronado’s
journal for a chapter in his book on the History of
Utah.69 From Bancroft’s work we get a different
perspective about the Spaniard’s perception of the
Grand Canyon area. The Spaniards described this
area as, “a mountain through which the river cut”
(emphasis added).70 That is, the Spaniard’s focus
was on the “mountain” – not the canyon.
Additionally, Bancroft’s translation states that,
“after this 20 days march, they arrived at that
river whose banks are of such height that it
seemed to them that they were three or four
leagues up in the air” and the Spaniards spent
“days skirting those mountains” trying to find a
way down off the rim (emphasis added).71
Bancroft’s translation clearly indicates that the
mountains were the Spaniard’s focal point. Yet, in
many ways, focusing on the mountain is not that
surprising if we take a moment to reflect upon
the challenging journey that the Spaniards
endured just to arrive at the inscription area.
Their approach to Grand Canyon (from the
east/southeast) meant that they had to scale the
Kaibab Upwarp which, when viewed from the
Hopi villages, appears as a daunting obstacle to
westward travel (Figure 19-9). The Spaniards
would have seen this landscape barrier for days - a
dry, distant sierra over which they would have
had to toil, ascend, and surmount. Perhaps their
arduous, arid mountain journey - marked by an
indefinite rising succession of imposing cliffs –
left an indelible impression on the Spanish
travelers, just as it did for other early travelers in
this region.72 At the MONTEVIDEO
inscription site, one’s gaze – across the open
expanse of the canyon, is drawn to the
topographically higher, north rim. Whether this
16th Century perspective could have influenced
the carving of the inscription is not known.
What we do know is that MONTEVIDEO
clearly refers to a “mountain” – and to “seeing the
mountain”.
CONCLUSION
Ultimately, no evidence unequivocally demonstrates
that the MONTEVIDEO inscription was carved
during the 19th Century. As such, a plausible
argument can be made that the MONTEVIDEO
inscription may predate the 1880s based on
______
69 Hubert Howe Bancroft, History of Utah: 1540-1886 (San Francisco: The History Company, 1889),
http://books.google.com/books/about/History_of_Utah.html?id=f20G8sJ91Q4C. URL (accessed November 4,
2011), 1-6.
70 Ibid., 1-6.
71 Ibid., 1-6.
72 F. H. Cushing, “The Nation of the Willow,” The Atlantic Monthly 50 (299) (Sept. 1882): 362-375; (300) (Oct.
1882):541-549.
previous arguments from Kenny73 and details
presented herein, including: (1) Van Dyke’s
written description; (2) the lack of physical
evidence to tie the inscription to 19th Century
tourism; (3) the inability to definitively determine
the inscription language;74 (4) paleography similar
to surviving 16th Century Spanish examples; (5)
the fact that during the 16th Century Spanish verb
forms - including “videō” - were in transition;
(6) notable dissimilarities relative to other 19th
Century Grand Canyon and Autograph Rock
inscriptions; (7) the lack of an inscription date,
commonly associated with most 19th and 20th
Century rock inscriptions; (8) the inability to use
weathering rate to determine a relative age; (9)
the likelihood that the Spanish explorers did not
descend into the canyon near historically
suggested locations (e.g., Desert View); (10) the
straight-line map measure method established by
Flint and Flint75 that places the Spaniards at the
Hopi/Havasupai trailhead that leads to the
MONTEVIDEO inscription; and, (11)
Bancroft’s perspective that the Spaniards viewed
the area as a “mountain through which the river
cut”.76, 77.
Fig. 19-9. West/northwest view of the Kaibab upwarp, leading
up to Grand Canyon from Second Mesa on Hopi lands. The
upwarp rises in the distance as a mystical, daunting, and
intimidating mountain. This is the ominous and disconcerting
view the 16th century Spaniards likely would have seen for
many days prior to ascending the mountain. Not surprisingly,
the Spaniards first described the Grand Canyon area as “a
mountain through which the river cut”— and, perhaps by
design, the compound word MONTEVIDEO also refers to
“seeing” a “mountain.”
______
73 Kenny, “A 16th Century Spanish Inscription in Grand Canyon? A Hypothesis,” 58-63.
74 One may speculate on the total number of 19th Century tourists that may have known Latin, however, the literacy
state of 19th Century tourists descending off the rim and into the canyon and out to the inscription promontory, is
not known. It has been suggested that the compound word MONTEVIDEO is also Portuguese (c.f., Uruguay’s
capitol city). Therefore, it should be noted that there were Portuguese soldiers in Coronado’s army and the identity
of the third person to hike down into the canyon with Captain Melgosa and Juan Galeros is not disclosed nor
recorded in any of Coronado’s documents. It is tempting to speculate that the third person may not have been of
Spanish descent and it was for that reason that his name was not recorded. This would be in keeping with the
overall lack of non-Spanish names recorded in Coronado’s journal. See also: Richard Flint, What’s missing from this
picture? The Alarde, or Muster Roll, of the Coronado Expedition In The Coronado Expedition from a distance of 460 years,
Edited by Richard Flint and Shirley Cushing Flint (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2003, 57-80.
See also: Bolton, Coronado, knight of pueblos and plains; Flint and Flint, Documents of the Coronado expedition, 605-615.
75 Flint and Flint, Documents of the Coronado expedition, 494-95.
76 Bancroft, History of Utah: 1-6.
77 Acknowledgments: Ian Hough (GCNP Anthropologist), the Cline Library staff at Northern Arizona University,
Michael F. Anderson (noted Historian), Jan Balsom and Ronda Newton (GCNP Science and Resource Manager
and GCNP Research Permitting Coordinator, respectively), Jon Upchurch (Traffic Engineer), and Kerrie E. Neet
for untold contributions, insight, support, and thoughtful discussions about the Grand Canyon history and
geology.