U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Americas
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-01-2019, 11:26 AM
 
12,511 posts, read 18,604,995 times
Reputation: 19799

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanLuis View Post
Mexico might have been the capital for only 9 years, but New Mexico was administred from Mexico city much longer than that. Mexico didn't entirely develop it identity after its independence.
We understand that, but again Mexico City was 1,000 miles away. You think officials in Sante Fe called them up on there smart phone and said "hey we have an issue here, how do we handle it"? You think Santa Anna took Mexican Air Force One for a quick trip up to New Mexico to check out things? It took weeks, perhaps months, to get a message back and forth.

Due to the limits of technology of the time, New Mexico was largely self administrated. In fact, New Mexico itself revolted in the 1830s when Central Mexico tried to impose it's rules on them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-01-2019, 11:41 AM
 
Location: New York Area
16,340 posts, read 6,454,521 times
Reputation: 12587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dd714 View Post
And that's your response? Have you given up? You conveniently deleted the rest of my explanation I see. Let me add to it again:
Culture by definition is a collective term, it represents the collected experience of a social group. Now I believe your "300 years of culture" represent pre-US ownership. That would be historically impossible - Coronado explored into New Mexico but it was not sparsely settled until about 1600 to exploit the indians and the land. We are talking less than 1,000 inhabitents. In 1680 the Pueblo Indians finally had enough and kicked the Spanish out by force and they didn't return until the end of that century. So you see, historicallym regarding the timeline, you are simply incorrect. This is a fact.

Now let's address population and logistics - in 1700 the non-indian population was about 3,000, in 1800 the non-indian population was about 20,000. 20,000 spread over 120,000 square miles. It was frontier - small villages, trading posts, mining camps, missions, isolated ranches and cabins. Santa Fe developed as the main trading center and later the provincial capital. Getting back to my statement about culture - only the Pueblo Indians have a history in this state, and actually exceeded the non-Indian population until the late 18th century. The Pueblo Indians were somewhat unique to the typical other nomadic Indian tribes of the southwest, having permanent settlements in New Mexico. Thus the culture is Indian, with a mix, if you will, of hispanic and anglo. The settlers, because of the distance from New Mexico, soon developed there own culture that fit into the frontier lifestyle and the trading and mixing with Indians and anglo traders and settlers. It had very little to do with central mexican culture. Most of that developed after the 18th century as the population increased.
The overall impression I have is that the entire region, from the Louisiana border to the Coast, was sparsely settled, with a few, very few, exceptions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2019, 09:51 AM
 
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
6,160 posts, read 9,620,649 times
Reputation: 3196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dd714 View Post
We understand that, but again Mexico City was 1,000 miles away. You think officials in Sante Fe called them up on there smart phone and said "hey we have an issue here, how do we handle it"? Due to the limits of technology of the time, New Mexico was largely self administrated.
There most certainly was communication between the two places. Starting in the 1500s governors were posted from Mexico City to Santa Fe. This practice continued through the early 1800s. New Mexico was no more "self-regulated" than Mexico City was. How long did it take messages to go from Spain to Mexico City?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dd714 View Post
And that's your response?
The hispanic people of New Mexico considered themselves as primarily part of Mexican culture until about 1960-1970. As I already said, they often referred to themselves as "mejicanos." Where did they get this from? Because they shared the same language, the same cultural practices and beliefs, and the same 300 years of history as the hispanic peoples located to the south.
You're saying the *only* people with culture were the Indians. This is incorrect. The hispanic people's culture derived from Spain, with changes that evolved from 300 years of living in the same lands as the Indians. This combination is what produced the Mexican culture.
There are many cultural practices of people in northern NM that are identical in every way, shape and form to practices by people much farther south in Mexico. Why is this? Because from the early 1500s through the 1800s the Hispanic peoples from the southwest U.S. all the way throughout Mexico were under the same rule of law, there was intercommunication between them, there was migration from town to town, they had a shared language (Spanish), they had a shared cultural background (derived at its core from Spain, combined with many generations of co-habitation and interaction with Indians.)
By the way, I grew up literally a five-minute walk from one of the Pueblo reservations in New Mexico.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2019, 10:42 AM
 
12,511 posts, read 18,604,995 times
Reputation: 19799
Quote:
Originally Posted by 80skeys View Post
There most certainly was communication between the two places. Starting in the 1500s governors were posted from Mexico City to Santa Fe. This practice continued through the early 1800s. New Mexico was no more "self-regulated" than Mexico City was. How long did it take messages to go from Spain to Mexico City?


The hispanic people of New Mexico considered themselves as primarily part of Mexican culture until about 1960-1970. As I already said, they often referred to themselves as "mejicanos." Where did they get this from? Because they shared the same language, the same cultural practices and beliefs, and the same 300 years of history as the hispanic peoples located to the south.
You're saying the *only* people with culture were the Indians. This is incorrect. The hispanic people's culture derived from Spain, with changes that evolved from 300 years of living in the same lands as the Indians. This combination is what produced the Mexican culture.
There are many cultural practices of people in northern NM that are identical in every way, shape and form to practices by people much farther south in Mexico. Why is this? Because from the early 1500s through the 1800s the Hispanic peoples from the southwest U.S. all the way throughout Mexico were under the same rule of law, there was intercommunication between them, there was migration from town to town, they had a shared language (Spanish), they had a shared cultural background (derived at its core from Spain, combined with many generations of co-habitation and interaction with Indians.)
By the way, I grew up literally a five-minute walk from one of the Pueblo reservations in New Mexico.
I don't know how the culture continued from the few 1,000 settlers. In 1680 Spain essentially abandoned New Mexico, they were chased out during the Pueblo revolt, any that remained would have been killed. This lasted for two decades. Did the original settlers return?

We are getting closer to agreement - the impact of Pueblo Indian culture on settlers. Apparantly they had there own version of Spanish as documented below, a mix of Spanish and Indian, such was there isolation from the rest of Mexico and, as we both agree, the mixing with local Indians:
https://iamnm.com/new-mexican-spanis...xican-spanish/
So we differ still on timing and impact. And really to the issue at hand - can Mexicans claim this land on the basis of a 140 years (not 300, as it was abandoned in 1680) of sparse and isolated settlements under, not even there own country, but the Spanish Empire? The current wave of immigrants from Mexico and Latin America have little to do with what culture remains of the original New Mexico. I wonder if they would even understand "New Mexico Spanish".

Note the reddit quote in the above article:


"We do not like to classify ourselves as Mexican..."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2019, 11:32 PM
 
122 posts, read 55,195 times
Reputation: 114
The Spanish had an inclusive culture, since the Spanish had also been "conquered" first by the Romans and later by the Arabs for nearly 700 years;
Their culture became wider and more extensive; they were very cosmopolitan in contrast to the English or other Northern Europeans. Because of this it was easier for the Spanish to mix with the local populations.

The native peoples generally became culturally Spanish but they kept lots of their traditions, such as: music,food,dance,etc. In many instances the Catholic church became jointed with local religions. It would be very difficult to say that he Spanish had an extermination policy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2019, 10:57 AM
 
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
6,160 posts, read 9,620,649 times
Reputation: 3196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dd714 View Post
I don't know how the culture continued from the few 1,000 settlers.
It most certainly did. All the way through the 20th century, the hispanic people of NM had cultural practices and language that dated back through the 1500s. This is true throughout Mexico. They maintained the Catholicism that was brought from Spain. They maintained many of the stories (oral traditions) that were brought from Spain, along with new ones introduced by interaction with Indians. They maintained the vast part of the Spanish culture, while incorporating stuff from indigenous peoples. This is what it means to be "Mexican."

Quote:
. In 1680 Spain essentially abandoned New Mexico, they were chased out during the Pueblo revolt, any that remained would have been killed. This lasted for two decades. Did the original settlers return?
The Spaniards returned (via Mexico) after those 20 years.

Quote:
the impact of Pueblo Indian culture on settlers.
Not only New Mexico. The tribes throughout Mexico had impact on the Spaniard-descended people located throughout the area. As you can expect, the Indians who were indigenous to northern Mexico/southern U.S. were related to eachother - similar blood lines, similar languages in some cases. The pueblo indians of northern NM for example are brothers to the Tigua in the El Paso area.

Quote:
And really to the issue at hand - can Mexicans claim this land
The Mexicans can claim cultural heritage to the land as much as they can claim it to their present-day lands. The Hispanic people of NM (and AZ, CA and Texas) were entirely Mexican in belief, language, culture all the way through the mid 20th century, as I have pointed out.
Quote:
The current wave of immigrants from Mexico and Latin America have little to do with what culture remains of the original New Mexico. I wonder if they would even understand "New Mexico Spanish".
Of course they would. New Mexico Spanish is no different than Mexican Spanish with the exception of a few words (less than 1% of the language) that are taken from local Indian tribes and a few archaic Spanish words left over from the 1500s. But Mexicans from small mountain villages in Chiahuaua, Sonora also understand these same archaic words. The argument that NM spanish is uniquely caught in a time capsule, is not accurate. The same thing happened in small villages throughout Mexico, all the way to the 20th century.

Quote:
Note the reddit quote in the above article:"We do not like to classify ourselves as Mexican..."
This was not the internally held belief of the hispanics. To the contrary, this was the Anglo rhetoric that took place in the 20th century when the Anglos took an active role in governing New Mexico. They started a campaign to disenfranchise the local Hispanic people - try to make them "better U.S. citizens."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2019, 11:07 AM
 
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
6,160 posts, read 9,620,649 times
Reputation: 3196
Quote:
Originally Posted by naners1 View Post
The Spanish had an inclusive culture, since the Spanish had also been "conquered" first by the Romans and later by the Arabs for nearly 700 years;
Indeed. To this day, there are a lot of words in modern use in Spanish (throughout the Spanish-speaking world) that come from Arabic.
Quote:
It would be very difficult to say that he Spanish had an extermination policy.
Correct. They had a "conquering" policy, which was often brutal, and they had an "assimilation policy" (ie. make the locals into Catholics), but they didn't have an extermination policy in the way the Anglos did with the Indians in the U.S. or the way the Germans did with the Jews.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2019, 11:24 AM
 
2,663 posts, read 901,472 times
Reputation: 1863
Quote:
Originally Posted by manxhunter View Post
During the Mexican - American war?

I'm asking this because there seems to be a lot of mexicans who are angry about it.
Why didn't they try to take back the lands they lost? How exactly would they have done so? If you haven't noticed, the US has a much more powerful military than Mexico.

Even if they could somehow have defeated the US military to take back those lands, it would have been difficult to subjugate them once they had become populated with settlers from the US, for example in Texas and California.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2019, 11:53 AM
 
5,505 posts, read 8,166,713 times
Reputation: 4322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo58 View Post
Why didn't they try to take back the lands they lost? How exactly would they have done so? If you haven't noticed, the US has a much more powerful military than Mexico.
The last sentence would had been all the answer necessary. lol

Quote:
Even if they could somehow have defeated the US military to take back those lands, it would have been difficult to subjugate them once they had become populated with settlers from the US, for example in Texas and California.
Mexico could also sent more people to settle in places like California or Texas to make harder US settlers would gain political sway.

In the 1870’s the US almost took over the DR. They lost the battle in the senate by just one vote. I have the official US Senate report about the DR. They even sent Frederick Douglass and other people to research the condition of the DR at that time, which was basically depopulated. Even US president Ulyses S Grant (he’s buried in a fancy tomb in NYC) gave a very positive essay in favor of the annexation of the DR and its at the final chapters of the report. The US made sure when it was time of taking over Cuba and Puerto Rico, that they would be able to take it by force and without going through congress and the senate. Their experience with Santo Domingo in the 1870’s made them in part do the dirty work of taking Cuba and PR away from Spain.

It was military might that decided taking land from Mexico and from Spain.

This is the report by the US government.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2019, 06:17 PM
 
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
9,995 posts, read 21,271,462 times
Reputation: 9518
Quote:
Originally Posted by manxhunter View Post
During the Mexican - American war?

I'm asking this because there seems to be a lot of mexicans who are angry about it.
Same reason a lot of Confederate sympathizers fly rebel flags but would never take on the USA military - they would loose badly. Not an uncommon thing, Greeks and Armenians lost a lot of land to the Turks and remain bitter but aren't capable of taken land back in a war against Turkey. Japan wants some islands back that Russia took. Mexico neither then nor currently would have any shot at defeating the US military.

The 'Mexican' claims to the USA southwest I think are more along the lines of Latinos of mostly Native American ancestry saying that their race used to dominate the entire Americas. That, as opposed to a loyalty to the Mexican govt which tends to be run by more European Mexicans and has a history of poor treatment towards Indios.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Americas
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top