Comments by "Kat 1515" (@Kat-fq4ei) on "HistoryLegends"
channel.
-
9
-
5
-
Mexican for a 25 year period. Mexico's first constitution 1815 did not include California, New Mexico (Arizona) or Texas as Mexico. Those territories were not involved in Mexican independence from Spain. Some Navaho and other California and SW tribes may have Spanish names, most were unconquered and had little contact with the Spanish and never acknowledged Mexico or identified as Mexican. In fact no one in these territories identified as Mexican until after 1821 much less the unconquered Indians who were never controlled by either Spain or Mexico. To date these northern tribes, Ute, Comanche, Shasta, Piaut, Pueblo, Apache, Kiowa plus hundreds of other tribes had little contact with the Spanish , did not and still do not identify as Mexican or mestizo, in fact many are 100% Indian. Going back to the era, from a better perspective, as for the Spanish settlers, those who lived during approximately 1821 to 1848, take a few years before and after, lived under three flags. Up to 1821 the historical flag of Spain, then some foreign soldier from very far away comes along and tells them they are now Mexican and changes the flag. A few years later another soldier comes along and tells them they're American, a new flag. True story..
5
-
4
-
4
-
What was Mexico thinking, firing the first shot to start the war on disputed land. Mexico was just hardly a young nation unable to take care of itself and unprepared to go into an international war, fighting among itself. Was unable to manage it's core, central Mexico, taking a bigger bite than it could chew claiming the disconnected and distant northern territories out in an isolated middle of nowhere, where Mexico met much resistence. Conquest is not stealing. War is about land. The United States wanted it. Mexico didn't fight hard enough, the United States stuck it out till it was able to take the young nation, all of it, occupied it, flying it's flag over Mexico and returned half back to Mexico, it's heart, under a Treaty, not under an exaggerated gun. Mexico took the money, swallowed it, as it was in deep debt and 10 years later sold more territory under the Gadson Purchase. The annexed territories were not historically Mexico to begin with and there would never have been a Mexico if 25 years earlier that part of New Spain, what became central Mexico had not gained independence from Spain. Or perhaps Mexico stole from Spain to leftist history revisonists anti American point of view. And what did Mexico want the northern territories for, never colonized or developed, neglected and the territories were self goverened, highly taxed, forced unpatriotic Mexican citizenship who had no need for Mexico. The lands were basically real estate property. Russia other than Spain had it's claims on California, Great Britain was interested, Spain was in the process of giving land grant settlements to Americans, Spain had transferred Louisiana and Florida, American nations were formed, borders changes, treaties, purchases, independence; no longer the early days European land explorations and land claims, yet not all Indians had met conquest after three centuries. Alot going on before Mexican independence. Stolen lands is woke history revison. Lands have been conquered and nations born since time began. Mexico is no exception. It lost the war, a Treaty was negotiated between both western nations, get over it.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
What rightful lands back.... CA and SW rightfully belong to Shasta, Piaute, Mohave, Chumash, Apache, Comanche, Navaho, Pueblo, Ute, Caddo plus hundreds of other tribes north of what is today Mexico. Today these inborn north tribes are not crying over Mexico, they inherently know their lands.... These northern inherent tribes hated Mexico back in the 1800s for trespassing on their lands. Ever hear of the Comanche slaughtering Chihuahua to shreds. The northern tribes claimed neither Mexico or the United States, ancient history talks..... but when push came to shove, sided with the good ole US of A... Nothing was stolen, they still live in their native lands protected by US federal Indian Law. , and those from Chihuahua, Sonora, still live in their lands, the native Mexican Indians to this day, rightful lands, are not protected by the Mexican gov. Up for grabs by the highest bidder. The 1848 Mx/US border area was out in the middle of nowhere unpopulated barren wilderness for centuries until Mexicans as well as America established border towns late 1800s after the Mexican War. Why did peasant Mexicans under a corrupt government migrate to the far away wilderness border---because of the United States, pendejo... As a Mexican the far north, homeland to the Apache, Chumash, Mohave etc was never the lands of your ancestors and johnny come late Republic of Mexico goverenment quasi claimed CA, SW for barely 25 years, 15 for Texas. Had Mexico not gained independence from Spain there would be no Mexico. In fact, Spain could have sold "Mexico" to France or Great Britain, for all we know, even Russia who had claims to CA way before Mexico.... Historical events make the world's borders. Mexico was barely a nation during the Mexican War, and not really independent until as after the War, France occupied Mexico trying to set up a monarchial Mexican system with a king y todo... Your blood is boiling over fake lands and fake history and United States tribes had no need for you yesteryear or have any need for you today. Sorry... Your Mexican people migrated to the border areas after the Mexican War, foreign immigrants to the United States.
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Just goes to show what little Mexican presence was in California as well as New Mexico/Arizona and Texas. These territories were not involved in Mexican independence, they were too far north from other parts of New Spain. Upon Mexico's first attempt at independence, Mexicos first 1815 constitution did not include these territories as Mexico. Not to conflate the Spanish Colonial settlers of this era from these territories with the Mexican Period. Mexican citizenship was mandated after 1821 under Mexico's 1824 constitution, Estados Unidos Mexicanos. These distant territories fell under Mexico's control after independence. It was mostly Mexican officials who transplanted to the far isolated wilderness north settlements. Texas brought in Americans to settle under land grants to populate vast lands and fight off the Comanche. There were no transplanted Mexican militaries in New Mexicos northern Spanish settlements, Kearney took NM without a single bullet shot. Mexican soldiers were transported to Texas to battle the Alamo, San Jacinto and the the US. Texas also was sparsely populated by Canary Island Spanish settlers. California tòo was sparsely populated by Spain. These were neglected and unincorporated Mexican provinces during the brief Mexican era. Interestingly, these Spanish subjects under the Spanish Colonial era lived under three flags during the transfer to Mexican citizenship, Spains fĺag of 250 years, Mexico's flag of 25 years-10 years for Texas and the USA flag after 1848. Referred to by SW historians as the Spanish Colonial Period, the Mexican Period and the Territory Period for New Mexico. Statehood for Texas and California. Not many years ago there were still folks around to tell the story of Mexican foreign soldiers from far away who brought the news of Mexican citizenship, replacing Spains flag with the Mexican flag, then a few years later another US soldier came by informing all they were now American citizens under a new flag. Folks need to go back to the day to get a perspective of the era. Mexicans migrated north after the Mexican War. It was the prosperity of the United States that many only look north. Had there been no USA the north would still be a barren desert wilderness. Where were they during the Mexican War, not up north. Now they greedly want to claim what was not theirs historically to begin with..
2
-
2
-
@GabrieldeCastilla-lk2jr You must be totally unaware, but Texas gained independence from Mexico, did you ever learn of the Alamo. And Texas became its own Republic of Texas after victory at the Battle of San Jacinto. Just 15 years after Mexico became a nation after Spains 300 years of controlling New Spain, so it was not Mexican land rather Spains territories. Texas History 6th grade education... The land in question was disputed land... Mexico claimed it as well as Texas by conquest, Texas later annexed by the USA. So there was no invasion, Americans were on land they claimed. Mexico fired the first shot and started the Mexican War.
USA Indian reservations far from concentration camps. In fact USA Indian reservations are sovereign nations and self governed tribes. And protected under USA Federal Indian Law and Indian Acts, have rights to reparations and many have been awarded and still are recipients of returned lands and waters by the US, plus they get millions of dollars of ridiculous amounts of US federal tribal funding annually, jealous..... USA Reservation Indians come and go as they please as US citizens under US freedom under the US Constitution; except on their reservations where they are subject to their own tribal rules as sovereign nations--each tribe has their own government. So you obviously have no clue on the torture of human in concentration camps in Germany. Much less do you know the system of sovereign nations within the USA and are a full of rubbish anti-American. Who fed you the garbage on concentration camps, no comparison, and worse yet you believed them with no ability to reason or think for yourself....
By the way some of these tribes like the Comanche and Kiowa bitterly hated Mexicans and attacked Sonora and Sinaloa back in the 1800s after independence when Mexico claimed the indigenous northern lands of tribes such as Navaho, Mohave, Chumash, Shasta, Piaut, Pueblo, Ute, Shoshone, Apache, Kumeyaay, Cheyenne plus other tribes. In the 1880s these tribes belonged to no nation as USA or Mexico, are today USA tribes and have nothing to do with foreign tribes on their lands just as in ancient times before European intervention in what is today the American continent. There was no Mexico until 1821 and at that time the Mexican government stole your indigenous lands and is still confiscating and Mexican indians are at odds with Mexico...
Looks like you're totally ignorant on the Mexican War and US American conquest along with inborn human instintual rule where victor takes the spoils, as always throughout the centuries, written in mans DNA. . Your ancestors killed off weaker tribes and thats how you survived thru the centuries... so why hypocritically point to the US... In fact, If Mexico had not claimed independence from Spain 1821, there would be no Mexico.
It's you playing with words and twisting history to childish robbery of Mexico... And ridiculous concentration camps. The Spanish and English encountered hundreds of tribes living in the land, today north America -- USA, Mexico , Canada, which they documented. No terra nullis whatsoever. Most Phillipines died of disease during the Phillipine American War and atrocities hit both, shedding blood on both sides, typical in war... So you don't know your head from your toes...
. Grow up...
2
-
You're upside down. Mexico started the war, lost and was conquered. Those are the rules of nature. Winner takes the spoils. Been happening since the beginning of time, nations all over the world are born by war and conquest. In the very same way Mexico battled Spain to gain its own independent nation. Mexico is nothing special or exempt from wars and innate rules. Nothing was stolen except for the Mexican goverenment stealing the lands of the natives after independence. Where are their reservations....
It's not the fault of the US that Mexico was unprepared for international battles, was in deep financial debt, had outdated weapons, was trying to govern it's people on shaky grounds, just hardly a nation of barely only 25 years still in diapers.... Mexico today is fortunate to have a country. The United States conquered, seized all of Mexico, occupied and controlled the land, the Mexican goverenment was in panic upon conquest and fortunate the United States returned half the country cause the United States could have taken all of Mexico had it wanted it. Mexico was far from sparsely populated with millions of people, in fact the Mexicans outnumbered Americans fighting on Mexican lands. The young Republic of Mexico 1824 itsef was imperialist claiming all lands to the far away north (California to Texas) and Central America. So imperialist, it refused 25 million dollars in payment for the northern lands it lost to war and conquest anyway. The United States got the land it wanted, which was way out in the wilderness, neglected by Mexico. The United States made no attempt for more Mexican land. Yucatan begged the United States to annex it, US refused. Imperislism, what about Mexico, Chiapas was part of Central America stolen by Mex. And what about Centra America, it was claimed by Mexico and and broke away. Has Mexico no shame lol. It claimed California and SW, who didn't want or need Mexico. Take the sty out of your eye before so you can clearly see the sty in your brothers eye... The truth is parts of New Spain was lands to become claimed by Spain, territories overtime purchased, treatied, borders disputed, borders changed, independence, wars, conquest, republics, nations all part of the making of the American continent. For the disgusting country the United States is, it is the greatest country in the world. People from all over the world are migrating illegally. No one is saying, let's go to Mexico. In fact, Mexicans have been migrating to the US since 1880, escaping poverty, corruption and a Mexican Revolution.
2
-
Octovio Barajas Loaiza Armed people go to your house and kick you out is no analogy. To begin with Mexico fired the first shot on disputed land stemming back to the Battle of San Jacinto between Texas and Mexico. Americans were on disputed soil, a grey area claimed by both. Mexico had no more rights on the land than USA. The USA won the Mexican American War by conquest in 1848 in the same way Mexico defeated Spain in 1821 and life goes on. In fact the infant Mexico was just barely a brand new Repubic, didn't have the preparedness or experience of a nation by the time the Mexican American War came along.
Had Mexico not gained independence 25 years earlier there would not have been a Mexico in 1824. Into the 1800s Spain had lost it's empire, handed over the borderlsnds Florida and Louisiana, and Spain had been working with the US for American land grant settlers in Texas. Spain would have negotiated with the United States on the SW and CA given the time as historically these New Spain territories were hardly Spains focus, barely financed, never conquered the Indians, or colonized these northern outposts serving Spain on French and Russian intrusion in 17th 18th centuries, Spains dynamics had changed by the 19th century in America and abroad. Europe still had it's hands in Mexicos affairs even after the War, and didn't come bat for Mexico.... Young Mexico was unable to manage it's heart/core, central Mexico, tried taking a bigger bite than it could chew, claiming Spains distant California and SW and Central America where folks were not Mexican at heart, were rebellious, unpatriotic, unincorporated, and were self goverened CA and SW lasted only 25 years under Mex., a very short time in passing.
It wasn't meant to be, the isolated northern territories were a vast wilderness out in the middle of nowhere, bordering the US who had a vision for the land. Mexico did not. Mexico never managed the thousands of unconquered northern tribes who bitterly hated Mexico entering their indigenous lands 1824, going to battles with Mexico. The Indians, not Mexico or USA, were still in control of their inherent lands. The Indians were life threatening, putting trembling fear in California/SW residents until late 1800s, conquered by the US, which by the way coincided with Mexican migration to the US border. How convenient.... Yucatan begged the United States to be annexed. So the people living in that disputed and neglected house they didn't value, need or want the house to begin with. Wars are complex, lame excuses are worthless. Learn the history, Nothing was stolen. California and SW residents, be they Indian or post Spanish Colonial settlers, still live in their pre-Mexican War lands, same lands they were from, today the US, tribal lands are US sovereign nations. No one is crying over Mexico, in fact 25 years of Mexico is well forgotten as the US flag was planted. Under three flags, Spains /250 years, Mexico/ 25 years, and the United States since 1848, Mexico's flag was by far insignificantly the shortest period. People from Chihuahua, Durango, Sonora still live in their native lands, today Mexico. The United States/Mexico border was in 1848 GH Treaty out in the uninhabited middle of nowheree, multi thousands sq miles of wildernesses
It's not all Mexicans but Mexican factions , anti American immigrant groups such as Mexican Chicano Studies professors 1960s and followers, other anti America, who make a mountain of a mole hill attempting to revise history who focus on rights of Indian native lands, adding Mexican mestizo to the pot; conflating todays Mexico with today's United States as one and the same. Not so... Historically SW/CA Indians as in the rest of the United States did not generally mix with the European, not a mestizo or metis culture to date. 99% of today's United States tribes were not primarily mixed blood back in 1848. Most mixed blood of SW/CA natives are products of the 20th C but more so approaching 21st C world in the US due to Indians leaving reservations for education, wars, jobs, etc Anti American history revisonists don't have the librarial historical backup documented by Spain ; records in Spain, Mexico City and New Mexico. . Though we'll intended, years of research or a thorough study on New Spain would help before putting this video on.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Only by woke cult indoctrination and history revionists who are fake historians... Real history is disputed land, war, conquest , purchase, treaty, border. Real history is Navaho, Ute, Comanche, Pueblo, Kiowa, Shasta, Chumash, Mohave, Piaut, Sioux and hundreds northern tribes who were never Mexican or mestizo.... and still live on their lands...
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Lupo-Molino_delRey Unless your Navajo, Ute, Comanche, Pueblo, Chumash, Shasta, Mohave, Kiowa, Piaute, Caddo Apache of a northern tribe in the USA these are not your lands. If you're Mexican your roots are in Mexico, your ancestors were not from anywhere USA.
.
2
-
@Lupo-Molino_delRey the Indians from the United States don't speak Spanish Lol... . As far as that goes, they never knew themselves to be Mexican or United States American back in most of the 1800s, or before than and later, they became US Americans. And to this day still see Mexican Indians as foreigners, outsiders, furthermore what is today the United States is lindigenous lands to the northern tribes Lol. They hated the Mexican back in 1821 and have no need for them today. No land was stolen, the United States and Mexico went to war, Mexico not only lost the war but the United States occupied Mexico and flew the USA flag over Mexico City. How's that for winning a war.... Many Mexicans were not even patriotic to Santa Ana..... Nations forever have known when they lose at war they lose the land, that's just the nature of things. . What..... are you saying Mexico stole land from Spain. If Mexico had not gained independence from Spain, there would never have been a Mexico to begin with. And if France had not invaded Spain, Spain would not have lost to Mexico. On the other hand, how could Mexico have owned California, New Mexico Arizona, Texas. Mexico never conquered the indigenous Indians, 1821-1846, in fact the non-Spanish speaking Comanche slaughtered Chihuahua in the 1830s. Actually the northern ,(USA today) tribes didn't even speak the same language as the Mexican. . The Mexicans feared and ran away from the northern tribes, the SW really was lands belonging to the Apache, Navajo, Pueblo, Ute, Caddo, Mohave, Shasta, Comanche, plus many more tribes who owned the lands and let Mexico know it. You can't own a land untill you conquer its natives..... After Spain, Mexico sort of borrowed the lands belonging to the native northern tribes for barely 25 years, till Mexico was kicked out. Mexico was incapable of running a nation and governing it's unpatriotic people, much less had any business in the very far north. . Mexico never conquered the tribes . The United States conquered the indians about 1880, the Indians surrendered to the US Army and today are proud US Americans, oh and are English speaking, just like the Gringo.......History talks. Nations talk. Good day.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Totally agree, very well stated. These distant quasi provinces were rebellious towards the foreign Mexican officials who were strangers in their lands and were basically self goverened during the brief Mexican Period, the unconquered indigenous were totally opposed to Mexico as well. Spain barely colonized/ financed the far northern territories during the 250 years Spanish Colonial Period which mainly served as Spain's outposts on French and Russian intrusion, by the 1800s Spain had given up Florida and Louisiana, no longer the great empire and was in the process of land grant settlements to Americans in Texas. New Spain's territories in the Mexico City areas were the offenders towards independence from Spain to become Mexico's in 1824, central Mexico was it's heart and core after it became the new Republic of Mexico. As you state Mexico was no oneness . Under Spain, New Spain's separate territories had different and very distant geographic localities, different cultures, peoples, tribes, politics, histories. Mexico tried it's imperialism in the SW and Central America but it didn't work out. Mexico bit more than it could chew, the territories conquered by the US were not historically Mexico to begin with. The progessive United States certainly was not going to inherent Mexico's deep seated internal issues.
2
-
1
-
1
-
Very interesting, but I disagree with some points on New Spain. Their were no Treaties established by New Spain within New Spain, approx 1525-1821. There were two Treaties established between Mexico and the United States 1848--1852 , the two young nations. Todays SW, were listed as part of Mexico's provinces under Estados Unidos constitution 1824. However, under Mexico's first Apatzingan constitution 1814, California, New Mexico which included Arizona; and Texas were not Mexico, according to the document. Today's SW parts of New Spains populations , were not involved in Hidalgos fights for independence nor did they take part in Mexico City's political dynamics or battles with Spain . New Spain of 300 years included several territories, far and wide, disconnected by distance, geography, cultures, tribes, politics, peoples.
The SW sparse populations, descendants of Spanish Colonial settlers under Spain and the many tribes , did not know themselves to be Mexican during the Spanish Colonial Period. Catholic Church genealogical documents record New Spain peoples as born, died , married in Spain or New Spain. Not Mexico. They were Español or mestizo according to records. But not Mexican as there was no Mexico until 1824. As they were under Spains caste system. Of the early 1500s Spanish Period, Onate was crillo, born in New Spain of Peninsular parents; his parents were Peninsulares, born in Spain who were New Spain colonists; Onates kids were mestizo, born of mixed parentage in New Spain; then there were the Indian and mulatto. But no "Mexican" under Spains caste system in New Spain. Spain controlled all aspects in New Spain as Spaniards/Españoles under Spains Empire... Equivalent to "the English," settlers in the New England colonies (Mexican and US American came about later in American history).... And there were metis among the English. All were subjects of Spains monarchal system in New Spain. New Spains peoples identified by the particular territories they were from as Mexicanos, Californios, Nuevomexicanos, Tejanos, etc as there were many territories with different tribes and histories. The only "Mexico" back then was in Tenochtitlan renamed "Mexico City" by Spain for the "mexica" Aztec who inhabited that area of approx 350 Sq miles. That was pretty much the extent of "Mexico" also called the valley of Mexico. Which was in the Kingdom of Mexico Territory, the territory appropriately named by Spain in New Spain. Spains subjects there were "mexica" derived from the mexica and "nos" derived from Spain, because they belonged to the mexica tribes. The mexica were surrounded by many New Spain tribes in other territories who were not mexica Indians. So those tribes were not mexica-nos, the European Spanish were well aware of the many different tribes , their tribal enemies, their different lands all with indigenous names. Tenochtitlan was pretty much the extent of Montezumas mexica empire, destroyed by Spain. Juan de Onate was not Mexica-n and thats a fact. Politics changed after 1824 upon Mexico's independence after 300 years.
Spain never acknowledged Mexicos independence, Spains king refused to sign the Treaty of Cordova. Spain never turned its lands over to Mexico under any treaties. Mexico piggy backed off Spains lands in north America that were left after United States and Spain land treaties/transfers with Florida and Louisiana; looks like borders changed within New Spain and the US. And Mexico , as Mexico claimed more lands under the 1824 constitution than under the 1814 Apatzingan constitution. Nevertheless Mexico claimed its lands under its constitutions. No Treaty with Spain. Mexico and Spain battled for another decade, Spain had hoped to regain the lands... so there were Treaties between Spain and the USA, Treaties between the USA and Mexico. And no treaty between Spain and Mexico. Under the 1824 Estados Unidos Mexicanos constitution, it's populations then became Mexican "citizens" like it or not. citizenship was mandated even to Anglo Americans living in Mexico during the 25 years Mexican Period.
You don't follow history and conflate the Spaniards with Mexicans. Totally different era's. Spain established the California missions for the Indians during the Spanish Colonial Period which were not supported or financed during the Mexican Period. During the Mexican Period, it was basically Mexican officials who transplanted north which was a dangerous uninhabitable isolated wilderness. Populations were sparse because Spains era held back on colonization, serious concerns by Spain on the many unconquered far northern warrior tribes , and fear of indian uprising in the isolated wilderness, as New Spain had experienced the Spanish settler massacres during the Pueblo Revolt and another uprising in California in the very distant north territories. Still unchanged during the Mexican Period, unconquered Indians all over today's SW. Chihuahuans, Sonorans and all those south of there did not migrate north until post Mexican War, approx 1880. They first migrated to US border areas with USA westward movement and US military quelling the Apache and Comanche who had been fierce tribes and greatly feared be it the Spanish and Mexican Periods, . Under Spains period, travel was rare on the Camino Real to the far northern isolated territories. Spain had very strict laws and permission was required. Journey was once a year with military caravans. During the Mexican Period, Mexico not only opened the Chihuahua Trail 1800s but also opened borders into the USA. On the Chihuahua Trail trade or journey was not flowing steadily until late 1800s, while the Santa Fe Trail , trade from Missouri prospered during the Mexican Period. The established US/MX border area was in a vast wilderness, middle of nowhere for hundreds of miles back in 1848. Few "Mexican" families dared journey transplanting in the north during the Mexican Period , basically this was an annomily... These never had ancestral roots in what is today the US. It was mostly the Californios from the Spanish Colonial Period who had already been in California's New Spain before independence, and not necessarily patriots of the young Mexican government .
You are speculating on the USA. It became a great nation. Spain was one ally to the New England Colonies during the Revolution. So credit does not go to Spain alone. New Spain under Spain held military power because Spain was a world power. Spain had developed Mexico "City" into the most advanced city in North America early on in the 1500s almost a century before Jamestown colonization. But Spain was loosing power by 1800, simultaneously the young USA 1776 was gaining power, founded as a republic based on democracy for the people, which Mexico upon independence used as a model for the Republic of Mexico. Truth is while the USA prospered, Mexico failed as a nation. Mexico as a young nation never had the power, influence, strategy, finances, unity as mother Spain to govern the young independent Republic.
Mexico 1824 was founded by mixed peoples because of its New Spain history of incorporating the Indians and Africans into Spanish society. Yet racism did exist but was never an issue as in today's liberal politics. New England Colonies separated the Indians and African, never part of English society, thus the USA was not founded by mixed peoples. Mexico may have abolished slavery, but it was racist among its own and part of the internal revolutions in Mexico. Mexicans complain today on Mexico's government taking indigenous lands. On the other hand, USA tribes are protected under US Federal Indian laws, US government has provided reparations galore to Indians, lands back, water rights, ridiculous amounts into the millions of dollars annually funded to tribes, and Indians are sovereign over their tribal lands. They have a strong voice in US America. They aren't complaining like Mexican Indians.
All in all, the SW populations were granted their centuries homeland under Spains 225 years Spanish Colonial Period, under the Treaty of GH and never cried over 25 years under the Mexican Period. They had been Mexican citizens for 25 years, 10 for Texas and became USA citizens after the Mexican War. Mexico was a Johnnie come late to the SW 1824 , and Mexico was gone with the blink of an eye...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Real_OSHA_Unsafety_Engineer No Mexico did not inherent the annexed lands from Spain. Spain did not sign the Treaty of Cordova in 1821 with Mexico as Spain did not acknowledge Mexican independence. Mexico's imperialist ego claimed much of Spains territories which it was unable to control. Under the Apatzingan Constitution, Mexico's first in 1814, California, New Mexico/Arizona, California are not Mexico, these territories were not involved in that part of New Spains independence (today's central Mexico), were not involved in Hidalgos political cause for independence, were no part of those territories battles with Spain. They were too far from Mexico City and neighboring lands/territories which were home to Aztec, Taracans and other ancient empires a thousand miles away.... Spain did not support Mexico during the Mexican American War. New Spain was many Territories acquired by Spains explorations encompassing several decades. The far north, California to Canada, New Mexico, Texas were some of the last, tierras nuevas, along with Florida which extended to Louisiana within the continent. Far and wide, including Cuba, Phillipines, Caribbeans, Central America, and present day Mexico.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@junior1497 Yet northern- central NM had the first 1598 settlement and richest Spanish Colonial history in the SW. The Mexican Period 1824 hardly brought any Mexicans, and US Territorial Periods 1848 and 1912 statehood, NM was basically unindustrial which did not attract Mexicans so northern NM retained its Spanish Colonial heritage being the Spanish stronghold in the SW. Southern NM was populated approx 1880s, mostly during the Territorial Period by Mexicans who had direct connections to Mexico in culture and blood. Arizona had been part of NM until the Territorial Period. And California, New Mexico and Texas had similar histories during the Spanish Colonial Period 1598-1821. By the time they were colonized the conquistador era was over, they were New Spains northern outposts for French and Russian intrusion into Spains territories, the Indians were unconquered, life was very distant, isolated, uninhabitable and Spain did not populate or make roadways to New Orleans because of the dangerous conditions, especially fear of Indian revolts.
1
-
@ProtomanButCallMeBlues uneducated... Mexicans are citizens of Mexico comprised of many nationalities. Mexican is not a race. Furthermore , Mexicans, Central Americans, South Americans, and USA descendants of Spanish Colonial SW and from Louisiana to Florida on the American continent, are all citizens of many Spanish American nationalities. Not necessarily New Spain and have historically identified and still do to their country of origin as Mexicanos, Guatamalos, Argentinos. Even those from the Spanish Caribbean as Cubanos, Puerto Ricaños... All Spanish America are culturally different, by history, geography, borders, politics, tribes, peoples.
Mexico is nothing but lands left over in north America in New Spain after Spain Treaty'd Florida and Louisiana. Mexico claimed these lands under the new Republic of Mexico government, Estados Unidos constitution 1824. "Mexico" borders changed 4 times within 40 years from no borders as there was no Mexico, to the 1814 Apatzingan constitution under which California, New Mexico and Texas are not Mexico; to Mexicos lands claimed in 1824; to half the lands returned to Mexico in 1848 under the Treaty of GH to include Mexico's heart and core. The USA kept the distant California and SW which were not part of Mexico's main, unincorporated, an not ancestrally Mexico.
Upon Mexican independence which was not acknowledged by Spain under any treaty, Mexicans hated and expulsed Spaniards and to date many Mexicans hold a hated for Spain, Cortez, Spanish. And historically proud of Mexican, their mixed Indian blood, holding a distinction between Mexican and Spanish... As compared to pockets in Spanish SW , Spanish Americans, culturally different from the Mexican, the SW not ancestrally Mexico. No question, had it not been for Spain, there would be no Mexico 300 years later, but Mexicans--citizens of Mexico, hardly identify as Spanish. It's a fact, Mexicans didn't even knew anything "Hispanic" upon entry into the USA at the turn of this century. Hispanic being a 1960s USA Census Bureau classification for people from Spanish speaking countries, rarely in use until the 1990s in USA with uncontrolled Mexican migration, popularized by media and politicians during this time. "Hispanic" unknown outside of USA borders until recently. Yet, Hispano was well acknowledged in the SW. Mexicans in the 21st century are doing DNA and learning of their Spanish blood and and more acceptable of European
The Spaniards headed toward the north todays USA SW to California and tierra nuevas by land and sea. But the Pacific Coast lands were disputed territories among the Spaniard, the English and Russian. And upon Mexican independence, todays SW were open for takeover by GreatBritain and Russia. The Russian and Spaniard were in today's Washington and Oregon over two centuries before Mexico. And Great Britain ships were sailing the areas. "Mexicans" are Johnnie come late to California and SW. Arriving not until the SW Mexican Period 1821-1846. They may have had Spanish blood, but they were totally different from the descendants of the 275 years SW Spanish Colonial Period, the SW being the homeland in this part of New Spain and Mexican government met with resistance. Those from Sonora, Sinaloa or anywhere south did not have ancestral roots in the distant north. In fact, those Mexicans who dared come during the Mexican Period were attacked by the Kumeyaay tribes in southern California reduced to almost no outsider Mexican. Not to mention Mexicans fear of the Comanche, of which Mexicans didn't even go near Texas during the Mexican Period. While the Spanish colonists had developed good relationships with Comanche since 1770. And what about the Kiowa and Apache attacks in Sonora and Sinaloa, leaving ranches and mines in shreds. The SW "Spanish" history of 275 years can go on and on--colonization, battles with Indians, expeditions to further north, protecting New Spain against Russian and French intrusion, conquered the Comanche, toiled the northern soil, etc. New Mexico and California were easily taken by the USA in the MexicanWar--hardly a Mexican soldier in sight. Mexico had to bring soldiers from the south. "Mexican" history was just starting in 1824, 25 year presence in the far north. A different government, different peoples, different cultures, different parts of New Spain. Same language as all were claimed/colonized during the European exploration era by Spain. Generally, Mexican didn't settle during the Mexican Period because the SW was far, isolated, uninhabitable wilderness, in many parts impassable. It's because of the USA that Mexicans look only north. The Spanish were already in the SW, didn't participate in Mexican independence or Mexico City politics against Spain. Mexicans have no need for Central America, of which parts had been Mexico for a short time too...These Spanish lands are all but forgotten, Mexico makes no claim to its south.... So rodeo and cowboys are Mexican. So what. The prosperous USA made the SW what it us today and the American Texan and Hollywood put rodeos on the map. It's nothing but cultural influences which has happened by migrations since the beginning of time... The horse, cow, saddle, alfalfa came from European countries connected in many ways, even blood relations. Uneducated haha... you gotta be referring to yourself.
1
-
@Egr-et6ar aridoamerican is nothing but a an ecological desert region . Big deal. An anthropologist theory. "Precolonial Mexico" is a misleading term as there was no Mexico until 1824, on lands limited to territories claimed by Spain. Spain introduced "Mexico" to common use because of Mexico City, land of the mexica Aztec, to become the influencal province in New Spain, because the government administrations viceroy and Europeans fine development was limited to the Kingdom of Mexico Territory early in the Colonial era, central Mexico today . Before European invasion, the lands were inhabited by many different tribes identified by indigenous names from Alaska to Argentina. Who pillaged, slaved, killed, genocided weaker tribes for natural resources. Never one nation, one government or one people. Tribes had been extinct since before European conquest.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The US had a total right by war, conquest, occupation, flying the United States flag over Mexico City, Treaty, 25 million dollars , border. Apparently you have an empty brain. Besides these were inherent lands to Navaho, Ute, Comanche, Shasta, Chumash, Pueblo, Piaut, Kiowa Apache plus many more USA tribes still in their lands. So you lost nothing but common sense.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Alot more to it than sparsely populated. Mexicos first constitution 1815, California, NewMexico, Texas are not Mexico. New Spain was many Territories far and wide even Cuba, Central America, Caribbeans, Phillipines, Pacific to Canada. Mexico is misinterpreted by historians as it became "Mexico" in 1824 under Estados Unidos Mexicanos constitution and flag. These territories from the distant north did not fight or were involved with Hidalgo for independence, rather were informed that they were mandated Mexican citizenship after Mexico took control after independence. Even then these territories were not part of central Mexico, its soul. The only Mexicans to transplant north were government officials. During the Mexican War there were barely Mexicans in California and Texas to battle, Mexico needed to bring Mexicans north to battle, New Mexico was won without a single bullet shot. Furthermore Mexico did not support the north militarily or financially, they were self governed, taxed heavily. In fact Nuevomexicanos refused to ally with the Mexican army to battle the Comanche. Many sided with Americans and after the War became USA citizens, if there was any patriotism, it waned after the Mexican government departed after the American US took control. Californios, Nuevomexicanos and Tejanos remained in the homeland, instinctively knew they were not Mexican and not historically Mexico. The northern tribes never acknowledged Mexico , in fact the Comanche and Apache battled fiercely with Mexico. And no one cried over Mexico, over and done with after 25 years. These don't celebrate Mexican Independence Day or even know the date... Sooner or later they would have gained independence from Mexico, just like Yucatan and Central America. Unincorporated, by all means....
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Possible so, but these lands were on the unpopulated outer edge wilderness of lands that Mexico claimed 25 years earlier after independence from Spain after 300 years. They were too far from central Mexico, self governed and poorly supported or financed, heavily taxed and unincorporated. Mexico was not in control. California, New Mexico which included Arizona, and Texas were not even Mexico in Mexicos first 1815 constitution. Mexicans lost nothing, Chihuahua and Sonora were undisturbed and Californios, Nuevomexicanos and Tejanos who had been mandated Mexican citizenship after independence, stayed in the homeland to become American, while the border was out in the middle of nowhere wilderness desert. As far as the Indians inherent to these lands 95% were unconquered, uncontrolled never identified as Mexican or American. These territories are not historically Mexico. So there's much more to the story
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The north back, it was Spains land, not Mexicos. Your ancestors weren't even in California, New Mexico or Texas during the Mexican War. The lands weren't Mexicos or your ancestors anymore than Guatemala, Colombia, or Pan America. In fact they were lands to Apache and Comanche feared by Mexicans. Plus many more tribes, Navajo, Shasta, Mohave, Kiowa, piate. Dream on or better yet read a history book...
1
-
Mexico knew it was had; conquest, occupation, US flag over Mexico City. A Treaty was in order. Half of Mexico returned--it's heart and core, 15 million dollars , a negotiated border into the far north wilderness desert which served Mexico no good. Forced to sign a treaty-rubbish.... victor always gets the spoils, that's how the world works, for centuries, those are inborn rules of war. Mexico is not an exception..
The USA was on disputed territory over on the Rio Grande. So the US had as much right as Mexico. Mexico started the war....historically speaking. There had always been land disputes in America, borders changed, treaties, purchases. The Treaty of GH was nothing new in America. Mexico later sold more territory-Gadson Purchase , 10 million more dollars for Mexico. More land for the US. Mexico's government was not crying over real estate lands, which were not even historically Mexico. 25 years earlier, these lands were Spains...
1
-
The crusty kid should have been informed enough to understand that New Spain was never Mexico or Mexican before European arrival or under Spain.
Texas, New Mexico or California territories never participated in Mexican independence with other New Spain territories in what's today central Mexico. It was Mexico City and surrounding territories who battled Spain gaining independence to become Mexico. Mexico's first attempt at independence, under the 1815 constitution, neither Texas, New Mexico or California are documented as Mexico. New Spain was always separate territories, California, New Mexico, Texas, Louisiana to Florida territories, many territories within what is today Mexico, Cuba, Central America, Caribbeans, Philippines , plus. The Rio Grande tributaries never sustained today's Mexico, its waters barely reached Chihuahua. 25 years prior to the Mexican War the lands belonged to Spain for 250 years. Any claim Mexico had was very brief and not historically Mexico. The California and SW populations were mandated Mexican citizenship becoming American citizens in 1848. It's all well documented by Spain, the United States and Mexico. There are even true stories not long ago by Spanish colonists from the SW homeland who actually lived under three flags. Spains flag, then a foreign soldier from far away comes with a new flag to inform they are Mexican citizens , a couple of decades later another soldier comes along announcing American citizenship under a new flag. Bet you don't celebrate Mexican Independence.....
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Right. Spanish Colonizers centuries Spanish land grants in northern New Mexico were stolen by Anglo settlers and the United States government. Thousands of acres and no reparations. While, the the same land grants issued by Spain in 1700 to the Pueblo Indians are protected under US Federal Indian laws. Thanks to Spains Land grants the Pueblo Indians lands , these tribes still live where Spain found them over 400 years ago; in the late 1800s their lands were protected from federal US takeover, they were not relocated by the US government to reservations like the Apache, Navajo etc or endured the unbearable Long Walk; while the Spanish American citizens in northern NM, regular Americans, had no protection or special privileges under the law. Lands were stolen to rich land spectators, US forest or US Bureau of Land Management in violation of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, as New Mexico was under Mexico's governance for 25 years before the Mexican War. New Mexico Spanish Colonial settlers 1598 had founded the far north Spanish European outposts in northern New Mexico before Jamestown colonization, protected the lands against French intrusion, allied with the Pueblo tribes to battle raiding Indians, protected the Spanish settlers and Pueblo Indians, Christianized the Pueblo tribes, the first to introduce European horses, farm animals, agriculture, weapons, language, Christianity, culture, human rights in today's United States. Had toiled the harsh northern NM soil for two centuries for love of the land upon US Americanization. And fought in the Civil War. If anyone is owed reparations, it's the two centuries old land grant owners in 1848 whose lands were stolen by the US federal government. Yet nothing on reparations. But in reality, most are grateful for American citizenship through independence from Mexico by United States conquest after 26 years under the brief SW Mexican Period...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
My point is self exclamatory. Invaders.... Spanish colonizers settled New Mexico, Texas and California 1598-1770, these territories the homeland... Anglo Americans settled in New Mexico and California since 1821. And Texas settled by Americanos under land grants since 1830s. When Mexico took control of these areas 1821, it was Mexican officials who left for the far north to let the SW populations know that they were under a new flag and government and were mandated Mexican citizenship. Mexican officials transplanted to these far north territories but not other Mexicans in general. When American Texans fought the Alamo, San Jacinto and during the Mexican War, there were just a handful of Mexican in Texas. When American soldiers invaded New Mexico by the War started by Mexico there was not one bullet shot fired. Barely just a few Spanish settlers and no match against the US. California and Texas also had no Mexicans to fight off the American army, and both Texas and California needed to bring in to these territories Mexicans from Chihuahua or Sonara "soldiers" many not even interested. These states had no Mexicans because the far north was never home to Mexicans. Mexicans began migration north after the Mexican War. Historcally, Mexicans were never a part of California, New Mexico/Arizona or Texas. And were invaders as much as anyone else. There's no territory to return. The United States didn't touch Chihuahua or Sonora; and Nuevo Mexicanos, Californios and Tejanos never lost any land through the Mexican War, they were still in the centuries homeland. Additionally, the lands belonged to the Navaho, Apache, Comanche, Pueblo, Mohave, Shasta, Piaut, Kiowa, Ute plus many more northern tribes who never acknowledged Mexico as their inherent lands. The border was out in the middle of nowhere barren desert. Mexicans weren't interested in the north till they learned about it during independence or the War. Then escaping Mexico to head for the USA, for a better life. History 1 01. Mexicans territory nothing.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@FM-ki4dl If anything, you were nomads who went from here to there for centuries. And finally established your tribes in Tenochtitlan, otherwise known as Mexico City. Hmmmm 1325. That's like an American Englishman trying to claim land in Hungary when his ancestors have been everywhere for centuries just as yours as your ancestors are immigrants to thecAmerican continent so you didn't originate in Utah or New Mexico. Aztec are connected to Central and South America in culture, arts, language, religion. Many SW tribes speak Dine from Alaska, and SW Zuni are just a mystery, their language is connected to Japan... Why the sudden interest in the USA wilderness desert you supposedly left after settling in Tenochtitlan a land with gold and riches after almost 2000 years. ridiculous... There is no evidence of any Atzlan anywhere... Really, your homeland is in Asia, not the USA, so go claim your home-- Asia, or Egypt, or who knows, but it's not the USA...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The annexed territories to begin with, were not historically Mexico. 26 years before the Mexican War, these lands belonged to Spain who did not recognize Mexican independence. Additionally the Spanish settlers from California, New Mexico/Arizona, Texas did not join Hidalgo against Spain or Mexico City political dynamics and battles toward independence from Spain. Mexico's first 1814 Constitution of Apatzingan did not recognize the far north California, New Mexico, or Texas as Mexico. Additionally Mexico's goverenment was not necessarily welcome in the far north territories, patriotism was an issue and the majority of the Spanish settler descendants Californios, Nuevomexicanos and Tejanos were given the choice to stay in the USA or transplant to Mexico under the Treaty, chose to remain in the historical homeland becoming USA citizens. 25 years does not make a Mexican which was born of mandated Mexican citizenship under Estados Unidos Mexicanos Constitution during the SW Mexican Period 1821-1846. New Spain was many territories separated by thousands of miles, far and wide -- California to Florida, Pacific Coast to Canada, today's Mexico, Central America, Cuba, Caribbeans, Phillipines , plus. New Spain had been governed by Spains viceroy in Mexico City and territories separated from New Spain in due time, little by little staring with Florida, Louisiana Purchase, Mexico, Central America, Texas Republic, today's SW, Cuba and on and on.
North Americans history did not began with Mexico ( Tenochtitlan later renamed Mexico City by Spain, today's central Mexico). Our history begins with many indigenous tribes who were never one nation or Mexican.
Our history is European claims; Spains territories and Great Britain colonies, French territories, Russian claims. New nations and independence from the mother lands starting with the USA 1776, land disputes, treaties, purchases, border changes, war, conquest, annexed lands.
Spain had claimed too much land; its focus, central government, financial power was Mexico City. It barely colonized or financed California, New Mexico, Texas which were difficult to colonize and basically very distant isolated outposts to guard Spains lands against French or Russian intrusion. Indians were unconquered and living conditions were too dangerous. Turn of the century, 1800s, Spain had given up Florida and Louisiana, and was in negotiations with Americans for land grant settlements in Texas, these were Spain/US borderlands. Spains priority was its war in Europe with France simultaneously fighting New Spain in today's central Mexico. No longer had deep pockets or a world power. If not for Mexican independence, the writing was on the wall, and Spain likely would have sold its USA borderlands it barely supported California, New Mexico, Texas to the USA.
SW Mexican Period, these were too far an isolated wilderness desert, and disconnected from central Mexico, were highly taxed with no return, automous and most likely were destined for USA lands. Who found the gold in 1849.... Actually it had been Mexican government officials who transplanted north after independence, not regular Sonorans or Sinaloans or other south of the border Mexicans. It was the USA that later attracted Mexicans to the north after centuries of thousands of miles of desolate lands untouched except by Indian roaming tribes from the north until Europe brought horses and weapons able to tackle barriers... war was never in history immoral and Mexico is no exception, war, conquest and loss is history throughout the world for centuries. In fact Mexico took it lands from Spain, the Crown never signed the Treaty of Cordova...Mexico helped itself to the territories from Central America to today's SW. You might say imperialism under its Constitution. The territories again were too much for Mexico , unlike Spain had no influence, finances, power, united government and had no control..
1
-
@chicago618 To clarify my post, there is general misinformation regarding historical documentation involving CA, NM-AZ, TX as being lands that were Mexico. True, but typically folks, historians, writters disregard or are ignorant that this was just for a brief few 26 years. Mexico declared independence in 1821 after, at that time, battles ended with Spain. The Crown of Spain did not sign the Treaty of Cordova refusing to acknowledge independence. 1836 Treaty was signed by Spain after almos a decade and a half after Spain finally accepted independence. In between both Treaties were a series of military hostilities between the 1st Mexican Republic 1824 and Spain, Spain attempted to regain control over Mexico, Spain lost the final battle 1829 and a new Treaty was in order 1836 , Spain finally recognizing Mexico's independence. How independent was the young Mexico, European France had their hands in Mexico until 1860s... The Mexican Republic, Estados Unidos Mexicanos failed to gain control of Spains Cuba territory. Louisiana and Florida had been treatied or purchased by the USA and Mexico had no claim to them
The 1814 Apatzingan Constitution supports SW historians, Mexican Period 1821-1846. Prior to this Period, CA, NM/AZ, TX were not recognized as part of Mexico and were not identified as protected/benefited under the Apatzingan Constitution of that day. These territories were not Mexico's children at that time....
The United States colonists voted for independence except for Loyalists of Penn and S Carolina. Many New Spain colonists were loyalists to Spain, unpatriotic to Mexico. CA, NM, TX New Spain colonists did not vote for independence, nor did any other territory for that matter. Rather Californios, Nuevomexicanos and Tejanos were informed of Mexican citizenship after the fact of independence and 1824 Mexican Constitution naming them subjects of Estados Unidos Mexicanos. But 26 years later, upon United States conquest, they immediately knew of the change of government. The difference, they were closer to the United States than to central Mexico, of which they were pretty much strangers to. And had ties with Americans via Santa Fe Trail from Missouri commerce trade and American mountain fur traders. Estados Unidos Mexicanos did not inherit Spains lands as Spain in 1821 did not surrender its lands. By 1836 the Mexican Republic had claimed Spains lands on its own through Mexico's 1824 constitution basically mandating Mexican citizenship to Spains territories. 10 years later, Spain did not come to Mexico's rescue during the Mexican War against the USA. The USA colonies Independence grew, gained new territories; while many territories Spain had claimed were lost by Mexican Independence.
Many SW colonists were loyalists to Spain and rebelled Mexican authorities who they considered intruders. They did not join the independence cause. Historically the USA recognized Spains territories and its Spain/US borderlands. And recognized Mexican independence. In reality, Mexico had little control over CA, NM, TX. Additionally the unconquered tribes indigenous to the far north NewSpain-- Navajo, Ute, Shasta, Mohave, Piaut, Chumash, Kiowa Comanche plus hundreds more never accepted Mexico or the US as their sovereign. And as with the Spanish colonists , sided with the USA over Mexico. One example is Nuevomexicanos refusing central Mexico to alli with Mexico's army to battle the Comanche who slaughtered Chihuahua, Nuevomexicanos never did warn of the upcoming ferocious attacks. Californios, Nuevomexicanos, Tejanos were forced Mexican citizenship and like the Indians, inherently knew they were not Mexican just like the indigenous northern tribes. The Apache was in awe of the USA paying Mexico $15,000,000 for lands they inherently knew was not Mexico. And I will just circle back to my original post, CA and SW are not historically Mexico. It is historical events of the past resulting where all of us are today.
1
-
@chicago618 To deconfuse, there is no record in the 1814 Apatzingan Constitution or as to your comparison analogy as you state, that "Mexico" of that day, was sovereign to territories that would become Mexico similar to the US. Based on documentation, the written record does not archive CA, NM, TX as Mexico in that Constitution.
The Treaty of Cordova 1821 is the first document to accept, between Spain and Mexico, what WILL become the First Mexican Empire. The record does not record the Crowns signature because Mexican Independence was rejected by Spain.
The 1824 Estados Unidos Mexicanos Constitution records the young Mexico's states and territories, which does record CA, NM, TX within Mexico. There is no documentation recorded on territories, or agreement of Spains transferring lands or waters to Mexico. The 1836 Santa Maria Calatrava Treaty does not document states, territories or boundaries.
The 1848 Treaty of G Hidalgo upon annexation of territories after the documented Mexican War, records in detail ; rivers, coast, ports, ocean, waters, landmarks, authoritative maps , boundary lines established between both nations. Clearly CA, NM, TX were within the Republic of Mexico, briefly, 1824-1848. But not ancestrally, as is typically assumed. Simply put, CA, NM, TX Mexican citizenship of 26 years is documentated and archived. Its referred to as the SW Mexican Period. No ambiguity. Its documentationed history. You can analyze all you want, but you cannot alter the record.
1
-
1
-
Right. Mexicans didn't lose any land. They are still in Chihuahua or Sonora untouched by the USA. The Spanish colonists didn't lose the northern homeland of California, New Mexico/Arizona or Texas. Mandated Mexican citizenship for 25 years is not Mexican. And the Apache, Navajo, Ute, Shasta, Piaut, Kiowa, Caddo, Comanche, Pueblo tribes, plus, never acknowledged Mexico or identified as Mexican and neither culture identified as mestizo. The Spanish and Indian didn't mix as the Indians were unconquered except for the Pueblo. The loosers were those Chihuahuans who missed the US border as they were too far north, so many now only look north.
1
-
@ericflores9201 it's you who needs to read a book or two and also take a look at New Spains maps. Cuba and Caribbeans were not under New Granada's viceroyalty and it was never stated that South America had been a part of New Spain, so you need to learn to read as well. The Philippines, regardless of whatever percent of blood ties to Spain, was nevertheless a territory of New Spain. Historically Mexicans have always prided themselves on their Indian blood significantly more than the Spanish blood, more accepting of Spain with current DNA tests, as most mestizo historically have negative attitudes towards the Spanish.... Mexico was established as a mestizo nation, Indian pride and let's not overlook Mexicos patron saint, rooted from the story of the apparition of Our Lady of Guadalupe who is really Tonantzin, the venerated to date, Aztec godess on Tepayac Hill, cemented worship into hearts and minds of the Mexican Indians and mestizos. . How about Mexicans hatred towards Spaniard Cortez and hatred for his indigenous lover and interpreter Malinche for betraying the Indians. Who knows where you get your upside down info, but it's not real history.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Just a quick historical overview. It's not odd, it's misinformation. Southwest and Californios are not historically Mexico, as there was no Mexico or Mexican until 1824. SW history is 250 years--Spanish Colonial Period; and only 26 years Mexican Period during which typical Sonorans or Sinaloans or any one south of there did not typically colonize California, it was basically Mexican officials who transplanted north. After 1848, was the American Period and California statehood. Mexican are immigrants to California, their ancestral roots are south of the border. Migration began with the prosperous United States to their north after the Mexican War approx 1880s. They are immigrants.
Historical owners is history revionist propaganda. Keep in mind not to conflate Spanish colonists in the California homeland under Spains Spanish Colonial Periods rule ending in 1821, these colonists are protected US citizenship under the Treaty of G Hilalgo 1848 and non immigrants to the USA. South of the border Mexicans migrated to US border areas after 1880s. Also US indigenous northern tribes never acknowledged Mexico or Mexican in their inherent lands--Comanche, Navajo, Ute, Mohave. Shasta , Kiowa, Piaut , etc hundreds more. These have never identified as Mexican and never will..... Mexicans don't have a leg to stand on or justification when they hear these were not their tribes ancestral lands. The 1910 Mexican Revolution brought many, and deportation sent many back 1950s. 1960s Immigration Act brought millions and turn of 20th century open borders brought millions more illegally...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The native USA tribes never had it as so good. The Apache, Navajo, Ute, Comanche Piaut, Kiowa, Shasta, Chumash, Pueblo, plus hundreds more northern tribes never were Mexican and today tribes receive ridiculous amounts of USA Federal funding annually, reparations, protected under Indian Laws in there sovereign lands with commercial enterprise, of which if they default the US feds will come to the rescue.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1598 to 1821 was the SW Spanish Colonial Period starting in New Mexico/Arizona , Texas and then California. Arizona, part of New Mexico was not colonized. The colonists and towns were established by Spain as well as the settlers during a time when there was no Mexico or Mexican in what was know as New Spain comprised of many territories. It's easy enough to refer to a New Spain map prior to 1821 on the territories far and wide, claimed by Spain after decades of exploration, including Cuba, Phillipines, Caribbeans, when there was no Mexico in the 1500s. Spains caste system in New Spain were Peninsulares ( born in Spain), crillos ( children of Peninsulares born in America), mestizo ( mixed Spanish and Indian equal to metis born of French or English and Indian), Indian ( indigenous) and mulatto ( mixed Black). But no Mexican. So the colonizers in California, New Mexico, Texas were of Spains caste system not Mexico or Mexican.
1821 parts of New Spain territories gained independence to become Mexico, under its new constitution, Estados Unidos Mexicanos, Mexican citizenship after 300 years under Spains yolk. Mexicans did not colonize the territories of the Californios, Nuevomexicanos or Tejanos which became the SW 25 year Mexican Period 1821-1846. The Spanish population including Anglo American settlers were then mandated Mexican citizenship, while the indigenous were generally unconquered and didn't acknowledge Mexico, while some indians, under Spains era 1598-1821, had accepted colonialism, allied with the Spanish and even had a pact with Nuevomexicanos. These all became US citizens under the Treaty of G Hidalgo, stayed in the homeland, followed by the US Territorial Period. Later south of the border, Mexicans approx 1880 after the Mexican War, migrated from mostly from Chihuahua, Sonora, Sinaloa to US border areas establishing border towns in wilderness areas never populated which had been lands to indigenous tribes who raided and attacked, tapering off after the US Army overtook them and placed in reservations. Mexicans were a Johnny come late in American history, 1800s..and generally did not colonize today's SW or California during the brief Mexican Period...
1
-
1
-
@HIDROGONIUMARINO Hard to determine what your talking about---who are we, they, them, that group are. Today, those from Mexico are Mexican citizens under Mexico's constitution since 1821. Those who broke away are Central American identified by their country. These from the SW are US Americans 1848. They were all separate explorations encompassing from 1519 to 1560, all became different Spains territories under New Spain along with Louisiana to Florida, Cuba, Pacific Coast to Canada, Caribbeans, Phillipines plus, far and wide. All governed by Spains viceroy. New Spain was never united as one nation. By and by after 300 years, territories, broke away from Spain and today fall under different nations and borders. The United States 1776 identified the new nation as United States of America because it was in the American continent. Mexico did not id as American, it name is Estados Unidos Mexicanos. The remote north SW was the homeland to Spanish Colonists since1598 who really never had roots in what is today Mexico. Some may have lived in Mexico City, Vera Cruz, Zacatecas for a few years, or headed to the far north just off the ship, these were early New World days. But they didn't have much connection with the Indians as in Mexico City. Mandated Mexican citizenship after Mexican independence 25 years and soon after became US citizens.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Between Mexico and the USA, both new nations in north America which developed from New Spain Territories and New England Colonies after three centuries of independence from the motherlands. None of these nations were invaded. Mexico claimed independence in 1821 following USA independence in 1776. The young Mexico Republic allowed Mexican land grants to Americans as settlers in Texas because during New Spains California, New Mexico and Texas territories were barely colonized by Spain during the 275 years Spanish Colonial Period 1598-1821, because these territories were very distant from other parts of NewSpain, isolated and barely financed by Spain. Spain did not colonize mainly because Spain never conquered the California and SW Indians and these New Spain territories were dangerous for colonists, Spain concerned over Indian revolts as what took place in isolated New Mexico with the 1680 Pueblo Revolt and massacre of Spanish Colonial settlers. Spain also was unable to make connecting roadways to Louisiana also part of New Spain, because of the feared Comanche in Texas. These distant northern New Spain territories served as outposts for Russian and French intrusion into Spains territories.
Fast forward to Mexican independence. Mexico claimed Spains lands which included the far northern territories California, New Mexico, Texas under its 1824 constitution as Spain never acknowledged Mexican independence or Treaty'd any lands to Mexico. Mexico needed to populate Texas as it was sparsely populated, hundreds of unconquered Comanche, and young Mexico accepted Americans to populate as settlers becoming Mexican citizens under Mexican law. Mexican politics, dictator Santa Ana, led to the Battle of Alamo between Texans and southern Mexicans, the final Battle of San Jacinto was a Texas conquest as Santa Ana was captured, leading to Texas independence, the Republic of Texas. Disputed land was unresolved between Texas and Mexico, which was not covered under the Treaty of Limits between Mexico and USA. The USA annexed Texas which of course now became part of USA. Disputed land of ten years unresolved. USA military set foot on the disputed land; Mexico claimed invasion and fired first shot, USA claimed US blood was shed on American soil by Mexico. Consequently the Mexican War. Fascinating history...
1
-
1
-
1
-
@petermuniz9296 Ancient history. Mexico is derived from the mexica Aztec from Tenochtitlan, renamed Mexico City by Spain in the valley of Mexica which was only about 350 miles in size, surrounded by enemy tribes and many tribes not mexica Aztec. So the Mexica were/are just a very small fraction of natives in today's Mexico right about where Mexico City is. If not for Spain, mexica/ Mexico would be almost unheard of. If not for Spain, Mexico would never have become a nation. And the mexica would be a lost tribe amongst the multitude of tribes in what would, if not for Spain, who kept "Mexico" alive because of Mexico City in regular use as "Mexico City" was prominent in all of New Spain territories as the seat of Spains viceroy and established with catholicism, hospitals, schools, government buildings, big pockets etc. Totally influencal because of Spains great empire.
1
-
1
-
@petermuniz9296 Mexico became a nation in 1824 under its constitution Estados Unidos Mexicanos. For 300 years before 1824 the lands, many territories from California to Florida, today's Mexico, Cuba, Central America, Phillipines, Caribbeans, Pacific Coast were New Spain controlled by Spain since the 1500s. Before that the lands were inhabited by hundreds of indigenous tribes all over what is today north America, with their own indigenous tribal names before there ever was a Mexico, USA, Canada.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Wars had no rules. 25 years was nothing. The lands were Spains for 300 years. Poor looser over what... Nothing was taken, Chihuahuas and. Sonorans still had their lands, the US didn't want em. The border was hundreds miles out in the middle of nowhere wilderness. Californios, Nuevo Mexicanos and Tejanos still had their lands. And the Navaho, Apache, Ute, Comanche , Mohave, Chumash, Kiowa, Piaut plus other northern tribes hated Mexico on their inherent lands.
1
-
1
-
More to your point and historically correct and stands to reason. Because "Mexico" stands for the mexica Aztec tribes. Their valley was renamed Mexico City by Spain, New Spain was separate territories and Mexico City was in the Kingdom of Mexico Territory. New Spain a caste system by Spain; Peninsulares were born in Spain, crillos were Spaniards born in New Spain, mestizo, Indio, mulatto. There were many non Aztec tribes from everywhere except Mexico City or Kingdom of Mexico Territory who did not identify as mexico, from other territories as Galacia, Yucatan, Nuevo Leon , Navarra, California, etc. Mexican was a much later identity except for those from Mexico City also referred to as valley of Mexico. Spain identified New Spains population by territorial location, not Mexico or Mexicans. For example, 1682 Diego DeVargas brought " Espanoles Mexicanos" as settlers in northern New Mexico, in the Territory of New Mexico, These were subjects of Colonial New Spain from "Mexico City" home to mexica Aztecs. They were Españoles from the mexica Aztec Territory. When Juan de Onate arrived in New Mexico 1598 he mentioned coming from New Spain. Mexico or Mexican is hardly heard of in Colonial New Spain. Genealogical Catholic birth records of that era are documented as born in New Spain or Spain, Españoles, mestizo. Not Mexican. During the 1810 political dynamics between New Spain and Spain "Mexico" was in its beginning but not inclusive of all New Spain. It was Mexico City and surrounding areas battling for independence from Spain. "Mexico's" first attempt towards independence, in its first constitution 1815, the far north, California, New Mexico and Texas New Spain territories are not Mexico. Even the Rio Grande tributaries did not sustain what is today Mexico or any Aztec tribe. The waters barely reached the outer edge of Chihuahua..
1
-
Mexico claimed the land only 25 years prior to the Mexican War, under its Estados Unidos Mexicanos 1824 constitution. Under Mexico's first 1814 constitution of Apatzingan, CA, NM/AZ, TX were not Mexico. Mexico just barely a nation in 1846. Spain did not recognize Mexican independence and Spains Crown refused to sign the Treaty of Cordova 1821. So there was no Treaty of land transfers. You're making a mountain of a molehill, 25 years is nothing, and the annexed lands were not ancestrally Mexico. Additionally, Mexicans ancestral roots are not in today's USA. Mexicans migrated to border areas after the Mexican War with the USA westward movement. Not to be conflated with SW Spanish Colonial settlers who had been in the SW for centuries, most chose to stay in the USA homeland under the Treaty of GH. The USA is what attracted Mexicans to the north. They were a desert barren wilderness, uninhabited for centuries with northern tribes roaming the wilderness. The SW population, descendants of SW settlers are still there along with the indigenous tribes and are not complaining over annexed territories. It's some outsider Mexican factions who cry over lands never theirs to begin with...
1
-
1
-
Texas became an independent Republic, neither Mexican or American. Texas later became part of the USA, no longer a republic, creating conflict on the Treaty of Limits which stared the War. 1700s disputed land was typical among Great Britain, USA, Spain, France, Russia--all sorts of treaties. Adams Onis Treaty was between Spain and the United States, had nothing to do with Mexico. Spain had expected to regain its lands after disputes with New Spain. And didn't sign the Treaty of Cordova. The Treaty of Limits was to clarify USA and Mexicos border, both nations piggybacking on the Adams Onis Treaty border. Texas Republic situation was neither here or there on the Treaty and the rest is history. Wars had no rules until WWII. The United States conquered Mexico and both nations agreed to the GH Treaty, purchase, border. With an additional Gadsden Purchase after the War..
1
-
This sounds like speculation. Mexico was offered a buyer and refused; and Mexico could have refused the Austins American settlers initiated by Spain. Manifest Destiny was the desire. But conflicts with- in Mexico and Mexico destroying its constitution lead to the Alamo. In war, who's to say, anyone can win. All in all, the territories were not Mexico, historically, or even culturally or politically, and it was in the territories best interest to become US American. They were out in the middle of nowhere , the US had a vision for the land and Mexico was unable to control central Mexico much less the isolated distant north .. Mexicans lost nothing, they remained in their ancestral homelands in Chihuahua, Sonora, Sinaloa. The border was out in the wilderness unpopulated desert except for roaming warrior tribes. While the Californios, Nuevomexicanos and Tejanos remained in their homeland. And the northern unconquered Indians never acknowledged Mexico..
1
-
Indians were nomads even at European intervention. Apache came from the north as the Navaho and have a commonality in the athabaskan language all the way to Alaska. Tribal brothers they were not. Apache tribes may have had genetic ties to Sonora, Talmahura , Sinaloa tribes who may have spoken the same language to a lesser degree but as for the Apache from what is today NewMexico, Comanche and Kiowa tribes, battled tribes into El Paso, Chihuahua, Durango, Sonora, Yaqui lands, killing pillaging and scalping until at least 1860. Indians all over north America for centuries banded into different enemy tribes and never were one indigenous nation or identified as as Mexican, American or Canadian, they identified to their tribes, Nations were formed, borders made boundaries, and they came under a national government and flag. Nomadic Indians just happened to be where they were when Europe came, 1500/1600s and who knows where they'd be today if not for the European . Exterminated nothing.... USA Indians today are sovereign nations, USA tribes get ridiculous amounts of federal funding annually, reparations to no end, protected under USA federal laws, Indian Acts and never had it so good. So I kinda think they'd be at a great disadvantage as Mexican Indians whom the government of Mexico continues to take their lands, to date. Which Jews in Germany have been gifted reparations? The truth is history is human violent atrocities for centuries. Had it not been the English, Spanish, French during the era of exploration, discovery, land claims and conquest. The Russian, Chinese or another nation would've done the same. In fact, the outnumbered European Spaniards conquered Montezuma because of enemy tribes who allied with Cortez. Many Pueblo tribes begged the Spanish to return after the 1680 Revolt for fear of the Apache and Navaho. Later the brown Comanche, were the superior tribe with no mercy and feared by all, would have exterminated the Pueblo of New Mexico if not for European Spaniard intervention. No utopia anywhere, and Indians would never go back to a stone age existence. Why judge a 16th century psyche with modern day lens. Justify history, no, but atrocities happened and no one, not even the Indians would want to return to their country of origin. Where would most go with centuries of migration land and sea. No one is really "native" in America. Historical events is where each of us is at today. Why cry over the past, we didn't even know our ancestors and all of us are descendants of slaves and lords over many centuries... Justify history, no. Anglo-Saxon USA founders knew how to create a great nation under democracy for and by the people, today all are equal under the law after a bumpy history, for this the world is piled up at our borders, illegally gaining entry to the racist white mans world.
1
-
1
-
@quarefremeruntgentes This is ridiculous, historically speaking. Spain did not recognize its Spanish Colonial settlers as Mexican. Spains caste system was Peninsulares, born in Spain; crillos, children or offspring of Peninsulares born in New Spain; mestizo , mixed European and Indian, mulatto, of black mix.... but no Mexican. New Spain Catholic Church records from the Colonial era document those baptized/marriage/deaths in Spain or New Spain as Españoles, mestizo, Indio. But not Mexican.
You are totally way off in New Mexico , founded by Spain under J de Onate, a crillo Spaniard, establishing San Gabriel 1598 in northern NM and first capital in todays USA by Spanish settlers under Spains rule; ten years later the capital was moved to la villa de la santa fe de San Francisco de Assi, known as la villa or Santa Fe, back in 17, 18th centuries. All of this wording came from Spain, not the New World. 1680 the Pueblo Revolt and the Spanish were exciled away from the indigenous Pueblo Indians territories in northern NM after 80 years by the Indians, to uncolonized El Paso which was in New Mexico in the 1600s. El Paso was abandoned after the northern NM settlers left and was not in Texas at that time. These same Spanish colonists returned back to northern NM twelve years later under Gov Don Diego De Vargas from Spain in 1692 during which New Mexico was reconquered, resettled; with colonists, governors, towns, agriculture, vineyards, herds, European culture, soldiers, Church, Spanish land grants even awarded to conquered Pueblo Indian tribes. So to date, descendants of Spanish settlers have been in northern New Mexico for over 400 years, today USA. And non immigrants , rather are in their homeland.... The oldest continued USA government building, Palace of the Governor is in Santa Fe, the oldest annual festival in today's USA is in Santa Fe, la Fiesta de Santa Fe in honor of northern New Mexico patron saint, La Conquistadora, who returned with the Spanish after the Revolt. These were Peninsular or crillo governors and governed and controlled by the Crown of Spains viceroy in New Spain Mexico City, as well as all other many New Spain territories-- territories of California, Texas, Nueva Galacia, Nuevo Leon, Nuevo Estramadura, Mexico, Yucatan, Navarra , Cuba, today's Central America, Caribbeans, Philippines, Louisiana to Florida, etc. They all were governed in Mexico City by Spain and the viceroy.
New Mexico just one territory of many in New Spain, the Kingdom of NM was populated by Spanish settlers during the SW Spanish Colonial Period 1598-1821; followed by the very brief 26 year Mexican Period 1821-1846, Mexican citizenship; to become 1848 US Territorial Period and US citizens going into statehood 1912. There was no Mexican or Mexico until 1821 under Mexico's 1824 constitution of Estados Unidos Mexicanos. All citizens became "Mexican" in 1824, in what became the Republic of Mexico, including Anglo settlers who lived in the young Mexico... This isn't history 101, it's 6th grade history. And there is significant documentation by Spain on New Spain historical records during the 300 years Spanish Colonial era housed in museums and libraries in Spain, Mexico City, Santa Fe. The only "Mexico" when Spain invaded in what they named Vera Cruz 1519 was a couple hundreds miles inland, Tenochtitlan, Aztec Montezumas kingdom, renamed "Mexico City" by Spain. Tenochtitlan was mexica Aztec territory or valley of Mexico, limited to what is central Mexico today, Spain named this territory Mexico, (a no brainer as it was Aztec mexica territory) surrounded by many other territories. All claimed by Spain, one by one after each exploration over several decades. Aztec were basically Indians, not Mexicans... your Mexican version, probably taught by Chicano Studies history revionists, is totally upside down, inside out. By the way, Mexicans were not colonists in New Spain Spanish era, 1525 historically speaking, the European Spanish Peninsulares/crillos were the colonists..... The Aztec mexica indigenous were not in control of anything, Spain was the political rule, Church, finances, infrastructure, government, horses, weapons, settler. Not Mexicans...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
But all those US Americans fought in the Civil War, Spanish America War, WWI and all others. And supported by the USA as a nation of unity. Patriotic.
How Mexico were they to begin with.... Texas, California, New Mexico/Arizona terrories did not get involved with those parts of other New Spain territories in the Kingdom of Mexico Territory areas, Mexico Citys political dynamics, Hidalgo and Guerrero, New Spain independence revolutionists . Neither were California, Texas or New Mexico named as territories in Mexicos first constitution of 1815. Mexicos 1821 independence, Mexico City the heart and core, did not support these northern territories militarily or financially, never settled the northern territories with Mexicans after independence (Americans came west), or bothered to conquor the hundreds of tribes roaming the lands. Just claimed the lands and didn't control them. One point is northern Spanish colonial settlers inherent to the Territory of New Mexico refused the Mexican government to ally with the Mexican military to battle the Comanche, or even warn the government on upcoming Comanche raids in Chihuahua. In fact the Apache, Navajo, Ute, Pueblo, Mohave, Shasta, Piaut, Kiowa, Chumash, Comanche and hundreds of tribes never acknowledged Mexico or inherently knew themselves as Mexican. Also the Apache and Kiowa tribes battled Sonora, Sinaloa, Durango, Yaqui lands at least till the 1860s. Sure looks like they didn't incorporate themselves to Mexico, and Mexico didn't incorporate them into Mexico. Quasi territories except for taxes.. Mexican ancestry.,,, Californios, Nuevomexicanos, Tejanos were actually informed by Mexican officials after 1821, who transplanted to the remote isolated foreign north, that they were mandated Mexican citizenship. Mexican ancestry nothing. "Mexican" was a Johnnie come late, after 1821 in New Spains 260 history under Spains flag and stamp in the SW. Patriotism was an issue towards the young Mexican government. And loyalty was to Spain, the motherland... Bottom line, New Spain, which was many territories near and far, was not Mexico 1500s to 1800s... Chihuahuas, Sonorans Mexicans migrated north to border areas after the Mexican War approx 1880, establishing Mexican settlements along with Anglo Americans settlements on barren and unpopulated wilderness for centuries. By the way, it was the US Army who quelled the western Indians, placed in reservations, you might say incorporated them.....
Mexicans are immigrants to the USA.. what is Mexican ancestry anyway, there was no Mexico , Estados Unidos Mexicanos, until 1821. Mexicans are logically Mexican citizens from Mexico of European, Asian, Middle Eastern ancestry etc as well as indigenous. Just as US Americans. Citizens of the New World years past the 16th century..
1
-
@eduardom.8766 being pedantic is because generally folks are very confused on SW History. Cross culture is not historical but goes back to the last century when Mexicans migrated more n more and influenced Spanish colonists in cities in the US west, becoming populated by Mexican American, outnumbering Tejanos and Californios. Except in northern NM, settlements since 1598, where Mexicans were not attracted to, as migrants in the 1800s. And the Spanish heritage was preserved and not culturally Mexican. The connection was the language. Until the last two decades Mexicans have infiltrated northern NM and the NM culture is dying out. Historical northern NM have been Americanized since the Territorial Period 1848 and cross cultured to Americans especially in populated cities for 150 years. But the culture historically is not Mexican. Folks are not immigrants, or identify as Mexican American, generally have identified as Spanish or Spanish American for the history. Not to conflate with Mexican American in southern NM who migrated in the 1800s and have connections, families in Mexico. But in time with mixing of cultures, Spanish north, Mexican south, primarily had been through education. And now, cultures are merged through US Americanization, same as cultural merging with Anglo, and other ethnic Americans. But anymore, 20 years, the landscape is illegal Mexican bringing their culture. As well the SW Indian has come together with other cultures even the northern NM Spanish, as historically in northern NM the Spanish and Indian lived separately and each preserved their heritage.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
As if Mexico didn't have dirty hands--too. Lol...On top of that, lost the war, lost land. USA had better gun's and better strategies and better finances. And a vision for the west, Polks Manifest Destiny - what a better way for CA the SW and its people. Who did Mexico have but traitors and just barely a nation in diapers.... No one from the annexed territories cried over Mexico which was gone in a blink of the eye, 25 years. Grow up, get over it. 200 years ago. You're just jealous over the gringo. It had been Spains land to begin with, had there been no independence, there'd be no Mexico. Spain had already negotiated with Austin on American settlements, the gringo, in Texas before independence and Mexico signed the Treaty of GH, plus 25 million dollars, all historical events, where we are today... lame excuses don't hold water..........
1
-
1
-
1
-
THis is racist rubbish. The so called "Mexican" citizens of that time 1841-1848 and Indians living in California, New Mexico/Arizona, Texas were protected under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo to become USA citizens after 1848, Indians were placed in reservations after the US Army halted dangerous Indian raids on citizens and placed tribes under protection by the Bureau of indian Affairs , to date are protected under US Federal Law, tribes get insane funding annually and are sovereign nations. Genocide is ridiculous, lives lost in Indian battles in the late 1800s were not genocide, which is over stated. This comment is anti American propaganda. True Kit Carson probaby killed more Indians than any of Spains soldiers, Spain never conquered the northern tribes in 250 years. And Mexico's 25 years in CA, NM, TX barely had control over the lands which were autonomous and Mexico had zero control over the northern Indians tribes who battled and hated Mexico.. And mestizo was not even the culture in the far north as the Indian and Spanish typically did not mix and each lived separately and practiced their own culture. The Spanish lived in their towns and Indians lived either in a Pueblo or way off , unconquered tribes hundreds of miles away disconnected from the Spanish except for raids or captives.... So mestizo was not the culture in New Spains far northern territories as in Latin America...
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Paul_ZK Your just a Mexican propagandist. Legally??? Spains laws in the 1500s legally were enforced in the New World. Spains laws and Spains great empire controlled the many separate territories, the natives, the Church, the lands. In New Spain which included the Caribbeans, Cuba, Philippines, Central America, today's Mexico, Florida which extended to todays Louisiana, todays SW-California to Texas. But especially so in the territories encompassing what is central Mexico today (Mexico City) as this was where Spains Vice Royal was politically seated to govern New Spain along with Spains Catholic Bishops who controlled all aspects of life and where the bulk of monies were lavishly spent, after all this was where the Aztec mexica tribe gold was found. The Republic of Mexico was a Johnny come very late 1824 to California and the SW. In fact the California and SW tribes NEVER knew themselves to be Mexicans in their inborn northern land's, this still stands to date. The tribes knew theIr inate lands which they fiercely protected. Take the Pueblo Indians who in 1682 chased the Spanish off (Pueblo Indian Revolt) their inherent lands to the south, todays Juarez, once off their lands the Pueblo didn't care where the Spanish went, ancient borders talk..... Don't conflate Spain with Mexico which were separate entities. Totally different governments. Mexico never had the power, influence, money, accomplishments that Spain once held. In fact there would be no Mexico if not for Spains 300 years developing what later became Mexico. It was Spain who renamed Aztec Tenochitlan, Mexico City after the.local mexica tribe, later to be known as the valley of Mexico which was not the home to all tribes, which were enemies, the valley was specific to the mexica tribe. And there would be no Mexico today if these first inland territories had not gained independence from Spain, these being the young Mexico's heart and core...
History did not begin in 1824 when Mexico became a nation as you assume. Back in 1517, when Cortez landed in Vera Cruz, there was no Mexico or Mexican, much less was there a Central America or United States SW that was ever Mexico. The English arrived in Jamestown not the United States in 1610, growing into English colonies.So there was no USA American. Neither historically or logically did early European settlers conquor a Mexico or United States. They were all just territories or colonies claimed by Spain or Great Britain. Historical events make todays world borders. Cry baby Mexican propagandists make a mountain of a mole hill, the Republic of Mexico claimed the SW for barely 25 years at the most. Russia claimed northern California before there was even a Mexico, France had claimed Texas, in fact Texas got its name from the Louisiana Caddo tribe many moons before there was ever a Mexican. Americans settled California, New Mexico/Arizona and Texas almost a century before immigrant Mexicanos migrated to border areas. In fact Mexicans ancestors are deep rooted in today's Mexico, not north of the border, United States. New Spain's territories were separated by up to over a thousand miles in distance, different cultures, peoples, tribes, geography, local politics, histories. It was the territories around central Mexico who went to war with Spain and gained independence, became Mexico. Mexico later tried imperialism into the far distant territories who were not inherently a part of the young Mexico. They were quasi unincorporated territories out in the middle of nowhere, self governed and basically answered to no one after Spains departure, yet included as provinces in Estados Unidos Mexicanos Constitution as citizens. Forced citizens. During the over two centuries SW Spanish Colonial Period 1598-1821, todays Spanish colonized SW was known as California, Nuevo Mexico, Tejas. They were not identified as Mexico except from 1824 to 1848, only ten years for Texas. The USA conquered all of Mexico during the Mexican War. Victor takes the spoils. Looks like you need a history lesson.
1
-
1
-
1
-
You need to go back to the early 1500s when the European Spanish arrived in what they named Vera Cruz and continued on to Tenochtitlan, the Aztex lands, renamed Mexico City by Spain for the mexica Aztec tribes. Spain continued exploration and claimed more lands each with different tribes, indigenous names and in time, some towns were given Spanish names These lands became New Spain. But it was not Mexico in the 1500s. Explorations continued for decades reaching the far north, California, New Mexico and Texas, claimed for Spain each named as a territories, also became parts of New Spain. Spain classified its people in New Spain as Peninsulares who came directly from Spain, crillos who were Spaniards born in New Spain, mestizo of mixed blood, Indian and mulatto. The only who Spain identified as Mexican were the Aztec from the valley of the mexica in Mexico City In the Territory of the Kingdom of Mexico as was identified by Spain . Other tribes were not mexica Aztec and were not Mexicans until 1821 when that part of New Spain became Mexico through independence from Spain under its new constitution of Estados Unidos Mexicanos. So Mexicans have been Mexican citizens only since 1821. A Mexican is a citizen of Mexico comprised of peoples from many nations just as anywhere in America. As far as language, different people spoke different languages, the Indians learned Spanish as New Spain was governed by Spain and the tribes also spoke their inherent tribal tongue. Pre 1821 the Indians did not identify as Mexican unless they were Aztec tribes from Mexico City mexica valley. You need to follow history along to get yesteryears perspective . Just because parts of New Spains territories became Mexico, a new nation in 1821 and its citizens became Mexican, doesn't mean the land had always been Mexico, Same with the English colonies which became the USA in 1776. New nations were founded in America on Indigenous lands that had no nations or names upon European explorations.
.
The young Republic of Mexico did not rent land to Americans. Mexico took control of Texas after independence and made out homestead land grants to Americans to populate Texas as settlers, because there were hardly any populations in the isolated wilderness vast lands. Also Mexico needed settlers to fight off the fierce Comanche and shield Mexican back in Chihuahua from the trembling fear they had for the Comanche. Mexico did not enforce its rules on slavery or anything much else. In fact, California and the SW were unincorporated provinces and pretty much automous and heavily taxed by the newly established Mexican government, Mexicans immigrated to the north after the United States came west. Their ancestral roots are not anywhere USA. Not to be conflated with Spanish Colonial settlers who had been in New Mexico, Texas and California since 1598- 1770. And were mandated Mexican citizenship for 25 years, yet many sided with the Americans. These became US citizens 1848. Spain sparsely populated these territories because the far north was much too dangerous, the Indians unconquered and warriors. But Spain needed northern outposts to ward off the French and Russian and these tough colonists survived through faith and self perseverance in an isolated land ..
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Not boring, very interesting. But the rest is history. Alamo, San Jacinto, Texas Republic, land dispute, War, conquest, occupation, purchases, treaty and border. Nothing new under the sun. Both Spain and later Mexico basically neglected the far north isolated wilderness which was open for the British, Russian and US. Spain should have just sold its border territories to the USA. They were too far from the rest of New Spain. Mexicos first 1815 constitution did not include California, New Mexico or Texas as Mexico. Series of historical events places us where we are today. Just think if Spain had not discovered what is today Mexico, say England or Russia had, the peoples would have turned out entirely different ..
1
-
Speak of imperialism, not all of New Spains territories fought for independence. Today's SW peoples back in the early 1800s did not join Hidalgo or Mexico City's activism, political dynamics or battles against Spain. In fact, under the 1814 Apatzingan constitution California, New Mexico/Arizona, Texas were not Mexico. 1821, Spain did not acknowledge Mexican independence and Spains King refused to sign the Treaty of Cordova. So Mexico just helped itself to the lands under its 1824 constitution. How's that for takeover of lands...
It is factual that after independence, it was Mexico's government officials who transplanted north to California and New Mexico. Mexico needed a population and allowed land grant settlements to Americans in Texas. The isolated SW was difficult to colonize, Indians were not conquered and living conditions were dangerous and uninhabitable with only a handful of descendants of Spanish Colonial settlers who were mandated Mexican citizenship after independence. The typical Chihuahuans, Sonorans or other south of there, did not settle in the SW during the 25 year Mexican Period. During that Period, America attacks upon warfare and just a smidgen population in the SW to battle. Many of the population had issues with Mexican takeover, wanted independence and sided with Americans. Mexican patriotism was a problem. SW was unincorporated, highly taxed and ignored by Mexico.
Yes, Mexico was occupied by rights of United States conquest flying the USA flag over Mexico and was in position to take All of Mexico, as throughout mans history the world over, the victor takes the spoils. But instead, American permitted that both nations agree to a Treaty--annexed lands and waters outlined in the Treaty, border, American citizenship for the SW population who did not necessarily care for Mexico, and a 25 million dollar transaction. That's alot more than no Treaty between Spain and imperialistic Mexico who took advantage of Spains lands while Spain was at war in Europe with France.... But that's how the worlds nations gain land... So Mexico made out royally by stolen lands from Spain...
Those in what became Chihuahuans, Sonorans and other south of the borderians never were interested in the north for centuries until the USA westward movement, trains to the border and Americans quelling the northern tribes and placing in reservations. Ever since many only look north. They have all forgotten Central America, of which parts had also been part of Mexico. But Mexicans cannot use the south, having no need for it. Nothing wrong with the gringos account and many Mexicans acknowledge a weak, unstable Mexico, who couldn't even govern its heart and sole, central Mexico, much less the very distant SW who were already trading with Americans via the Santa Fe Trail from Missouri and in close proximity to the USA... US takeover was destined to happen as Spain had claimed too much land, barely financed and populated, unconquered Indians, plenty land was in the north eventually meeting US borders. Spain had even permitted American settlements in Texas after two centuries of closely guarded borders. So times were changing after 275 years... .
1
-
Only a snowflake would compare breaking into a house to war. To begin with, there was no invasion; the land Americans were on was disputed territory, claimed by Mexico and the United States. Mexico started the war...
So the USA pointed a gun over a few dollars. It was more like millions of dollars impoverished Mexico had never seen the the likes of and spent as soon as it was handed over. Mexico's soldiers were starving and ragged. And Mexico owed Europe for cost of the war.. Imperial Mexico played dirty since its inception 1821. It musta broken into Spains house, but didn't have the decency to negotiate or purchase, LOL... And couldn't manage all those lands. Mexico was just plain ole silly to start a war it was unprepared to tackle... Blood shed was on both sides as is the scenario in all the world's wars. Mexico is no exception to humanity's inborn laws of wars world wide. And the annexed lands were claimed by Mexico for a mere 25 years and not ancestrally Mexico. Unless your Apache, Navajo, Ute, Shasta, Chumash, Pueblo, Mohave, Piaut, Comanche, Kiowa or other indigenous northern tribes, the lands weren't Mexicos any way. So what are you crying about... Educate yourself on SW history and grow up.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1