Omar S. Valerio-Jiménez’ novel River of Hope: Forging Identity and Nation in the Rio Grande Borderlands, depicts the villa del norte settlements which examines, “violence resulting from multiple conquest, of resistance and accommodations to state power, and of changing ethnic and political identities” (Valereo-Jiménez 1). Jiménez documents the regions history to the Civil War examining state formation, ethnic and nation building. The Rio Grande is a fascinating area that had been influenced by many opposing powers the Spanish and independent Mexico. Culminating to the Anglo-American expansion that lead to colonial nation building and well as ethnic identity.
Jiménez’ novel focus’ on the strict Spanish caste system in chapters one and two.
…show more content…
As a result of harsh tariffs, smuggling becomes ever so popular. The villa’s del notre began to distance themselves even more from Spain with the Texas border. After a while smuggling “the villas were sharply diverging” (99) and replaced the Spanish trade system. The vecinos became even more angry and urging for independence when soldiers began to raid for money and supplies. The vecinos were angry with the inability to protect from the Apache and Comanche attacks. All these disagreements culminated in 1821 with Mexican independence from …show more content…
Ord the commander of the Department of Texas to the United States Committee on Foreign Affairs. The main idea is the status of the Rio Grande area that there is ongoing raiding by Indians. The quarrel is whether the Indians are Mexicans or Texans because they are “predatory in their habits, they live by plunder” (TFT). Gen Ord argued that “they are not citizens but savages” (TFT). General Ord states that they derived from the leadership of Cortina and Diaz “who were the head of wild and lawless people” (TFT). The primary source is referring to an event known as the “Cattle Wars” which involved cattle rustling as Mexico's attempt to reconquer. Mexican nationals “begun crossing into Texas to steal cattle from Texans” (263). Though many groups stole cattle “politicians and the press blamed Indians and Mexicans” (263). Jimenez uses the primary document “Texas Frontier Troubles” to add to his point about the tried relationship among the peoples in Texas. Anglo-Texans harbored thoughts that Tejanos viewed “violent antipathy towards gringos” (TFT). Many generalizations were made in witness during the Federal Testimony. Witnesses of the raids illustrate racism. When asked by the panel why Tejanos are singled out the panelist responded, “Mexicans are extremely arrogant and ignorant, in the way of intelligence they are a hundred years behind”
In the afternoon of February 23, 1836, Santa Anna’s army arrived in San Antonio. The Texan defenders retreated to the well-fortified Alamo. Santa Anna had given the defenders time to escape if they wanted, but the Texans stayed, confident with their weaponry. With the few soldiers he had, Colonel Travis sent requests to Colonel James Fannin for reinforcements, but received none. Fannin thought that the 300 men he had wouldn’t make a difference and may not arrive in time. Of the 200 defenders, there were settlers who wanted independence as well as a dozen Tejanos who joined the movement. Although they believed in ind...
Around the time of 1821, with Texas still attained by Mexico, land was extremely cheap attracting American settlers. Mexico was full on against their new comers due to slavery. These Americans would bring their slaves to live with them, but the act of slavery was against Mexican law. The new settlers sought out the idea of cessation from Mexico and its president, Santa Ana. Texas would now fight for its independence if necessary. Of Course, Santa Ana was against the idea of Texas breaking free; he prepared an army that would follow him to San Antonio where...
8. Meyer, Michael C., et al. The Course of Mexican History, 7th ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003.
Differences between cultures are not something new. Many of us can still see it in our daily lives. Four hundred years ago two very distinctly different cultures clashed in what we call the American Southwest. The Spanish presence brought new ideas, new culture, and new way of life to the new found Americas much to the demise of the already settled native tribes. Already having controlled much of Mexico and South America, problems were rising in the outskirts of New Spain. Secular and religious authorities were in conflict and the ever growing animosity of its aboriginal tribe made it difficult to maintain Spanish control. Though, for four generations the Spaniards had begun to feel successful in their endeavors of New Mexico. In early August, the sedentary and nomadic tribes banned together and overthrow the Spanish authority. There are many angles needed to be addressed in order to see why this happened. Historians and anthropologists have been trying to go beyond the bias history to uncover what happen. In the book “What Caused the Pueblo Revolt of 1680”, historians try to answer this question, some theories hold more pull then others in terms of what and why. Through reading this anthology I believe the revolt happened for cultural and religious reasons because the Spaniards were threatening the indigenous people’s very way of life through violence, exploitation of land/resources (food), and demoralization of their old ways and practices.
Mexican culture is perhaps the largest influence on the state of Arizona, affecting the cuisine of Arizona quite heavily. Mexican food is widely popular in Arizona, meaning that there are plenty of local Mexican restaurants, each giving a unique experience. Mexican culture also has strong ties to the history of Arizona, as it was once territory belonging to Mexico. Mexicans who inhabited the region over a century ago fought with tribes native to the land in order to wrest control from them. However, war erupted with America on April 25, 1846. The war, now known as the Mexican-American War, resulted in the Mexican Cession. The Cession effectively indoctrinated the states of California, Nevada, most of Arizona, and various sections of other current day states. The war’s start can be contributed to many things, one such reason being the acceptance of Texas as a recognized state by the U.S. This created a great deal of tension with Mexico, as Texas was once their territory, until Mexicans and Americans overthrew the governor of the region and appointed their own leader, Samuel Houston. Houston then brought Texas in as a state to the U.S. in order to assuage any aggressive acts by Mexico. However, tensions soon flared when several small incidents along the border of Mexico and Texas lead to the war. Many politicians in the northern states opposed the war, claiming that it was an attempt of the southern slave owners to gain influence in the new territory. While most of the territory of Arizona was obtained by the end of the war, it was the Gadsden Purchase that attained the rest of the state, along with the southwesternmost part of modern day New Mexico. The purchase gets it’s name from the United States ambassador to Mexico, James Gadsden, who signed the treaty approving the purchase of the territory in the year 1853, not all too long after the
Rosales, F. Arturo. Lecture 2/14 Film The US-Mexican War Prelude. Weber, David J. - "The 'Path of the World'" Foreigners in Their Native Land: The Historical Roots of Mexican Americans.
Hackett, Charles W. Declarations of Josephe and Pedro Naranjo. Revolt of the Pueblo Indians of New Mexico and Otermin's Attempted Reconquest 1680-82. University of New Mexico Press, 1942.
Burns, E. B., & Charlip, J. A. (2007). Latin America: an interpretive history (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson Prentice Hall.
J.R. Edmonson, The Alamo Story, From Early History to Current Conflicts (Plano, TX. Republic of Texas Press 2000)
The Texas Revolution has occurred because of major events that lead long before the first shots fired at the Battle of Gonzales. In the year 1835, the tension between Mexico and Texas has erupted into violence when “Mexican soldiers attempted to disarm the people of Gonzales” (1). Therefore, this flickered many Texans for war independence. Texas has been part of the Spanish empire since the 17th century. However, in the late 1820s, only 3,000 Spanish-Mexicans were settling in Texas. After winning their independence from Spain in the year 1821, Mexico was welcoming many Americans that were called “Anglo-Americans” that were emigrating from the United States in hopes that they would become “loyal Mexican citizens” and “keeping the territory from
“The Conquest of New Spain” is the first hand account of Bernal Diaz (translated by J.M. Cohen) who writes about his personal accounts of the conquest of Mexico by himself and other conquistadors beginning in 1517. Unlike other authors who wrote about their first hand accounts, Diaz offers a more positive outlook of the conquest and the conquistadors motives as they moved through mainland Mexico. The beginning chapters go into detail about the expeditions of some Spanish conquistadors such as Francisco Hernandez de Cordoba, Juan de Grijalva and Hernando Cotes. This book, though, focuses mainly on Diaz’s travels with Hernando Cortes. Bernal Diaz’s uses the idea of the “Just War Theory” as his argument for why the conquests were justifiable
was the big problem with the American Settlers, which with in a few years out numbered the Mexican population twice if not more in Texas. The United States had been trying to purchase Texas and other territories unsuccessfully. A movement began to stir in Texas
In Stephen Austin a famous Empessario approached the Mexicans in Mexico City and pleaded for Texas independence. The Mexican government refused and even set up a law called the April 6, 1830 law, which stated that...
...them, plus, the northern territories of Mexico were not populated, so it was very inviting for them. So, basically, it was the Americans invading Mexican territory and the Mexicans were just defending their selves from the invading settlers. The Mexicans were also angered by the annexation of Texas, which used to be apart of Mexican territory.
Life in Mexico was, before the Revolution, defined by the figure of the patron that held all of power in a certain area. Juan Preciado, who was born in an urban city outside of Comala, “came to Comala because [he] had been told that [his] father, a man named Pedro Paramo lived there” (1). He initially was unaware of the general dislike that his father was subjected to in that area of Mexico. Pedro was regarded as “[l]iving bile” (1) by the people that still inhabited Comala, a classification that Juan did not expect. This reveals that it was not known by those outside of the patron’s dominion of the cruel abuse that they levied upon their people. Pedro Paramo held...