Lecture 5 Outline
North and South of the Rio Grande: A History of Mexican–American Relations
Discussion topics from last week’s readings:
o
Deadly Politics of Giving: Exchange and Violence at Ajacán, Roanoke, and Jamestown–How did
Indians and Europeans view gifting and trading differently?
The History of New Spain, Cortés and the Conquest of 1521—Conquistadors, looking for gold, slaves and
civilizations – and heavily allied with tribes unsatisfied with Aztec rule – conquer Aztec Empire in 1520s.
Conquest of other regions of Mexico not as easy or quick as often portrayed (Mayan areas) but fairly brutal.
New Spain soon established as successor to Aztec empire. Spanish rule brings plantation-based colony with
enslaved or un-free labor (encomienda->hacienda). New Spain highlighted by Catholic Church as strong player,
religious and cultural syncretism, and a unique racial hierarchy, peninsulares, mestizos, indios, negros/slaves.
European wars of the 18th century sap imperial power of Spain, various cycles of reform/control pit European
peninsulares against native-born Mexicans, creoles. During turbulence of Napoleonic wars, Mexico
“conservatively” revolts and gains independence from Spain 1808–1821. New state forced to survive on its
own without protection of mother country. Foreign powers seek to gain political influence and access to
resources (Great Britain, France and, notably, U.S.) – an ever-present pattern in Mexican history.
Tejás and Northern Mexico—The young Mexican state attempts to solidify its northern border. Emigrant
settlement long a favored tactic, encouragement of U.S. settlers proves to be a mistake. An authoritarian push
by central Mexican government results in revolts in the North—Texas revolution one such example. Mexican
forces headed by Santa Anna invade and are defeated. Texas Republic declared in1836, US formally annexes
Texas in 1845 – an open affront to Mexican sovereignty which leads political standoff.
U.S. president James K. Polk sends forces to Rio Grande, the then-disputed border – a skirmish serves as
pretext for war. Mexican–American War (1846) an absolute disaster for Mexico and shock to the Mexican
people. Mexico City taken in 1847. The Mexican Cession of 1848 secures for the American side the entire SW of
modern U.S. (California, Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, Texas) equal to half of the territory of the Mexican
state; $18 million to Mexico. Overwhelming American military might often cited as reason for lopsided U.S.
victory, but fact of matter is that provinces of Northern Mexico were never successfully integrated into Mexico
proper; they were peripheral areas within the “collection of semiautonomous provinces” that was Mexico.
Indian powers in the region also played a key role (Comanche Empire).
Mexican Cession creates unique circumstances in Southwest: ~80,000 Mexicans remain north of the border,
their rights strongly safeguarded by peace treaty. Racism and violence prevalent on both sides throughout war
and continue after hostilities end. The role of Mexican-Americans as second class citizens becomes a political
issue. Mexicans didn’t easily fit into white America’s conceptions of political (and racial) entitlement.
The Conundrum of New Mexico—unlike other territories or states ceded by Mexico, New Mexico was
predominantly peopled by Mexican citizens. Political issue of whether N. Mex. territory could/should be
accepted as a state (i.e. like any other) rests on question of whether Mexicans are fit to take part in American
democracy—the “congregation of like-minded persons”. Generally accepted racial view in U.S. is that Mexicans
are not white, language issue and religion also play a part; Mexicans have more nuanced view of race, less
immutable. Mexican issue also an Indian issue: over 75% of Mexicans in SW were Indians, 25% mestizos. Grand
debate in latter half of 19th century and turn of 20th hinges on whether a federal citizen of the United States can
simultaneously be a second class citizen (politically disenfranchised). In 1912, after nearly 70 years of debate,
New Mexico gains statehood, long after smaller, less populous states (Nevada, Colorado) with higher white
populations gained status. In modern SW, still much animosity between Mexican-Americans and white
Americans, particularly in places where fighting and violence is in near past—cross-border raiding, banditry and
wildcat economy continue long into 20th century.
The Borderlands—In times of social upheaval the border has offered refuge (financial or political) but also
concrete support to social movements. Both sides seek to use this to their advantage, Mexican War of
Independence, Mexican Revolution, World War I, the “War on Drugs” etc. all offered opportunities for
countries to meddle across the border. Many groups have found political refuge beyond the border (Mormons
etc.) or find opportunities to flourish (Comanche traders/raiders etc.) Until very recently U.S.–Mexico border
has not been a strong political border; can be seen historically as a borderland of cultures and peoples outside
scope of mainstream political forces – Indians, settlers, traders, criminals, resource plunderers, immigrants.
Both governments have struggled (and still are struggling) to create a political boundary in region where
culture, economy, social forces etc. tend to prohibit such a boundary. Many peoples (and animals) live in a
borderland foreign and separate from national integrated territories – Indian reservations split by border,
adjunct populations of jaguars and bighorn sheep just a few prominent examples.
Selected Reading:
Recovering History, Constructing Race: the Indian, black and white roots of Mexican Americans, by Martha
Menchaca, pp. 215–276 (A little long, yes, but you have permission to skim a few pages)
Borders and bridges: A history of U.S.-Latin American relations, by Stewart Brewer, pp. 35–57 (pages 59–78 are
optional reading but well worth the trouble)
Suggested Musical Interlude:
Cortez the Killer by Neil Young
Remember the Alamo by Donovan
Andrew Pattison
Oulu University
Focus Areas in North American History 682373A
AvP13