Gadsden Purchase Research Articles

A Historical-Variationist Analysis of Subject Pronoun Expression in 19th and Early 20th Century Arizonan Spanish

This diachronic study is a variationist analysis of subject pronoun expression (SPE) in two key Spanish-language Arizonan newspapers, El Fronterizo (1878–1914) and El Tucsonense (1915–1957), following Tucson’s annexation to the United States through the Gadsden Purchase, a period of great social change during which the Spanish-speaking population in the city underwent a gradual process of anglicization. Since some research on SPE in Spanish in the United States suggests that English-Spanish bilingualism increases the use of overt subject personal pronouns (SPPs) because of their almost categorical use in English, this study’s main aim is to track the initial stages of such progression in a period when social bilingualism was steadily extending in Tucson. In this respect, our results show that the presence of overt SPPs does increase over time in the data analyzed; however, lower rates of overt SPPs in contemporary Tucson and Phoenix spoken Spanish raise the possibility that the percentage surge in the aforementioned period is rather due to the offline written nature of the newspapers, which, for instance, weakens the effect of online constraints, such as switch reference, ambiguous TAM endings, and non-reflexive verbs. Even so, regression analyses with the mixed-effects statistical software Rbrul reveal that the linguistic factor groups shaping SPE in the diachronic data are essentially the same ones found operating in contemporary varieties of Spanish.

Tracking subject position change in U.S. Southwest Spanish: what 19th and 20th century Tucson newspapers tell us

AbstractThis study explores convergence in subject position in U.S. Southwest Spanish at the outset of its extensive contact with English. The data analyzed come from two Spanish newspapers published in Tucson, Arizona, in the years following the city’s annexation to the United States through the Gadsden Purchase in 1854:El Fronterizo(1878–1914) andEl Tucsonense(1915–1957). During this period of early language contact, the Hispanic population in Tucson faced a gradual process of anglicization that changed its status from majority in 1880 (63.8%) to minority in 1940 (29.9%). If there were structural convergence between the languages at stake, then there should be an English-driven gradual decrease across time in the postverbal subject use exhibited in the newspapers studied, as heritage varieties of Spanish develop. However, regressions with Rbrul show that, in the period analyzed, the probability of using postverbal subjects was not affected by the passing of time. Moreover, regression analyses show that the linguistic constraints affecting subject position in historical Tucson Spanish are basically the same that condition the variable in contemporary varieties: absence of a postverbal phrase, sentential subjects, presence of a preverbal phrase, unaccusative verbs, animate subjects and heavy subjects. This study also shows that the weakest factor groups in contemporary varieties of Spanish started their declining process at least a century ago.

Reconnaissance in Sonora: Charles D. Poston’s 1854 Exploration of Mexico and the Gadsden Purchase by C. Gilbert Storms

Reconnaissance in Sonora: Charles D. Poston’s 1854 Exploration of Mexico and the Gadsden Purchase by C. Gilbert Storms

Tucson: A History of the Old Pueblo from the 1854 Gadsden Purchase. By David Devine

Tucson: A History of the Old Pueblo from the 1854 Gadsden Purchase . By David Devine. (Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2015. vii + 298 pp. Illustrations, maps, charts, notes, bibliography, index. $39.95, paper.) As the old cliche admonishes, the devil is in the details. David Devine has taken that saying to heart as he meticulously details the history of Tucson, Arizona, since it became part of the United States in the mid-nineteenth century. Devine argues that boosters’ attempts to promote the city at the expense of the Old Pueblo’s “identity, history, traditions, and cultures” were misguided, but city officials succeeded in making Tucson the second-largest city in Arizona despite their ineptitude (p. 2). Most importantly, Devine contends that the ultimate result of this success is a city riven by inequality. The book, while interesting and well written, is at times …

Reconnaissance in Sonora: Charles D. Poston’s 1854 Exploration of Mexico and the Gadsden Purchase. By C. Gilbert Storms.

Reconnaissance in Sonora: Charles D. Poston’s 1854 Exploration of Mexico and the Gadsden Purchase . By C. Gilbert Storms. (Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 2015. xi + 193 pp. Illustrations, maps, appendix, notes, bibliography, index. $40.00.) The movement of American adventurers and explorers, intent on knowledge and gain, characterized a good part of the early history of North America. During the first half of the nineteenth century, this activity focused on the trans-Mississippi West, including the Southwest, where filibusters journeyed into Spanish, then Mexican, Texas and, after the American victory over Mexico in 1848, northern Mexico. Charles Poston was an American filibuster who sought to take advantage of the anticipated U.S. purchase or annexation of disputed territory in what is today southern Arizona and northern Sonora. … lawsonr{at}bacone.edu

Natural Resources and the Law in Hispanic Arizona: The Babocómari Ranch and the Living Legacies of the Gadsden Purchase

Natural Resources and the Law in Hispanic Arizona: The Babocómari Ranch and the Living Legacies of the Gadsden Purchase

“Who Will…Pay for their Sufferings?”: New York Abolitionists and the Failed Campaign to Compensate Solomon Northup

637 Documents and Interpretations “Who Will . . . Pay for their Sufferings?”: New York Abolitionists and the Failed Campaign to Compensate Solomon Northup Roy E. Finkenbine, University of Detroit Mercy Eighteen fifty-four proved to be an eventful year in American history.1 Many of the year’s events further heightened the growing sectional struggle over slavery. Proslavery politicians facilitated the Gadsden Purchase, annexing a strip of southern Arizona and New Mexico into the Union, thus completing the outline of the continental United States. In one of the most famous renditions of a runaway slave under the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, thousands of Bostonians jeered and draped their homes and businesses in black as federal officials and troops marched Anthony Burns to a waiting vessel to return him to Virginia bondage. Hundreds of thousands more in the North were grieved and angered after reading newspaper accounts of the rendition. The Kansas-Nebraska Act repealed the decades-old Missouri Compromise, bringing the Second Party System to a resounding end and placing the slavery question squarely at the center of American politics. The Republican Party, a sectional party whose main premise was opposition to the extension of slavery into the new federal territories in the West, came into being. A blustery speech by Senator William Seward of New York in the halls of Congress sounded the opening salvo of what would be years of undeclared civil war between proslavery and antislavery forces on the ground in Kansas, testing the concept of “popular sovereignty” included in the Kansas-Nebraska Act. Working behind 1. Roy E. Finkenbine is Professor of History and Director of the Black Abolitionist Archive at the University of Detroit Mercy. An earlier version of this article was presented at the thirty-second annual meeting of the Society for Historians of the Early American Republic in Rochester, New York, July 25, 2010. The author would like to thank Diane Barnes and the anonymous reader for New York History for their comments. 638 ■ NEW YORK HISTORY the scenes, proslavery diplomats maneuvered unsuccessfully to wrest the island slave colony of Cuba away from the Spanish empire and add it to American territory.2 Less heralded, perhaps, but no less important, thousands in the free states read slave narratives in 1854 and were moved to heighten their involvement in the antislavery struggle. Among the most moving of these autobiographies—penned or dictated by former slaves to inform and instruct northern readers of the horrors of bondage—was that of Solomon Northup, a freeborn New Yorker, who was kidnapped into slavery.3 Born in 1807, Northup lived in Saratoga Springs prior to his capture, supporting himself, his wife, and their three children by working as a tradesman , carpenter, and musician. In March 1841, he was lured southward to Washington, D.C., with the promise of lucrative employment. He soon found himself drugged, without his free papers, and in a slave pen awaiting sale. Shipped to New Orleans via the mechanisms of the internal slave trade, he labored for twelve years as a bondsman on cotton and sugar plantations in the Red River district of Louisiana. Solomon Northup was freed in January 1853 through the efforts of his wife Anne and a politically -prominent white patron, Henry Northup. Soon after, he converted his life-story, with the help of local attorney David Wilson, into a booklength narrative entitled Twelve Years a Slave. Published in July 1853, the volume circulated widely over the next few years, selling more than thirtythousand copies by 1856, second only to Frederick Douglass’s slave autobiography . Capitalizing on the public enthusiasm for slavery stories fueled by the recent publication of Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin, Northup’s tale increased the audience for other slave narratives, convincing publishers to bring out an expanded edition of Douglass’s celebrated 1845 Narrative. Northup himself played a role in generating such enthusiasm, giving antislavery lectures and peddling his narrative across New York, New England, and Canada West (contemporary Ontario) between 1853 and 1857.4 2. David M. Potter, The Impending Crisis, 1848-1861 (New York: Harper & Row, Publisher, 1976), especially chapters 7–9, remains a valuable narrative of the major slavery-related events of 1854...

At the border of empires: the Tohono O'odham, gender, and assimilation, 1880-1934

The story of the Tohono O'odham peoples offers an important account of assimilation. Bifurcated by a border demarcating Mexico and the United States that was imposed on them after the Gadsden Purchase in 1853, the Tohono O'odham lived at the edge of two empires. Although they were often invisible to the majority cultures of the region, they attracted the attention of reformers and government officials in the United States, who were determined to assimilate native peoples into society. By focusing on gender norms and ideals in the assimilation of the Tohono O'odham, At the Border of Empires provides a lens for looking at both Native American history and broader societal ideas about femininity, masculinity, and empire around the turn of the twentieth century. Beginning in the 1880s, the US government implemented programs to eliminate vice among the Tohono O'odham and to encourage the morals of the majority culture as the basis of a process of Americanisation. During the next fifty years, tribal norms interacted with--sometimes conflicting with and sometimes reinforcing--those of the larger society in ways that significantly shaped both government policy and tribal experience. This book examines the mediation between cultures, the officials who sometimes developed policies based on personal beliefs and gender biases, and the native people whose lives were impacted as a result. These issues are brought into useful relief by comparing the experiences of the Tohono O'odham on two sides of a border that was, from a native perspective, totally arbitrary.

Fiasco: George Clinton Gardner's Correspondence from the U.S.-Mexico Boundary Survey, 1849-1854 (review)

Reviewed by: Fiasco: George Clinton Gardner's Correspondence from the U.S.-Mexico Boundary Survey, 1849-1854 Lance R. Blyth Fiasco: George Clinton Gardner's Correspondence from the U.S.-Mexico Boundary Survey, 1849-1854. Edited by David J. Weber and Jane Lenz Elder. (Dallas: SMU Press, 2010. Pp. 428. Illustrations, maps, appendix, notes, sources, index. ISBN 9780870745621, $50.00 cloth.) It is all too easy, as this reviewer has done in survey courses, to present the nineteenth-century United States as a leviathan moving inexorably forth under the banner of Manifest Destiny. But as we move from the macro to the micro on the historiographical scale this view is increasingly distorted. Take, as David J. Weber and Jane Lenz Elder did, the U.S.-Mexico Boundary Survey as experienced by one George Clinton Gardner. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo that ended the war between the U.S. and Mexico decreed both governments would send representatives to survey and mark the new boundary between the two nations. In February 1849, Gardner, the seventeen-year-old scion of a Washington, D.C., family, received an appointment as the junior assistant to the chief astronomer of the U.S. boundary commission. For the next five years, Gardner worked the line between San Diego and Yuma and then down the Rio Grande from El Paso to the river's end. The whole time Gardner wrote letters, primarily to his family, and these letters make up the bulk of Fiasco with Weber and Elder providing context and additional information. Gardner candidly discussed the personalities, rivalries, and quarrels of the boundary party. He provided day-to-day details of his life in strange lands, often under harsh conditions, including his social life, showing himself as a man of his time and place. Overall the impression the letters leave is that Gardner was a young man enjoying a grand adventure. But his letters also reveal much about the functioning, or dysfunctioning, of the boundary commission, especially its crippling financial and logistical problems. It took Gardner five months to travel from Washington to San Diego as lack of preparation resulted in a three-month delay in cholera-infested Panama. The commission ran out of money while surveying the line in California, placing Gardner on unpaid leave in San Diego for eight months where he fortunately found employment with a family acquaintance as a clerk and spent his spare time riding, writing, dancing, and socializing with the californios. Even after work resumed in July 1850, the survey was not completed until June 1851. Gardner then made his way to El Paso after a short home leave in November 1851, but due to further financial and logistical delays, the survey of the El Paso line was not complete until May 1852. Attempts to survey down the Rio Grande were dogged by a lack of funds, to the extent that the entire commission was disbanded at Ringgold Barracks in Texas, opposite Camargo, Mexico, in December 1852. Gardner went home, but Congress finally disbursed the necessary funds and he returned to the Rio Grande in the summer of 1853 to complete the survey. By January 1854, Gardner was heading back to Washington, D.C., to join his father who had just been appointed the surveyor general of Oregon, missing the final survey of the Gadsden Purchase and ending his time in the Southwest. But was the boundary commission really a fiasco? Or was it just the way the federal government did business in the mid-nineteenth century? An under-explored theme in the history of the West and Southwest is the inability of the federal government [End Page 452] to meet the many requirements it assumed or was assigned. Reach often exceeded grasp, sometimes with tragic results. Gardner's experiences may simply have been par for the course. Yet this is only apparent from such a personal, micro, view. With Weber's and Elder's efforts in Fiasco we now have material with which to begin to make such inquiries. [End Page 453] Lance R. Blyth U.S. Northern Command Copyright © 2011 The Texas State Historical Association

Native American Land Rights in Southern Arizona

When mnch of the northern Mexican tenitory was added to the United States under the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848, and the area south of the Gila River were added by the Gadsden Purchase in 1853, the rights of all Mexican citizens were explicitly protected and confirmed. The story of how much of this land in California. New Mexico and Texas was transferred to Anglo owners in the course of the legal challenges that followed annexation is a comulex one, and has been dealt with elsewhere. The status of Tohono O'odham lands was at best, ambiguous under these provisions. It is the legal vacuum created by this situation that I wish to examine.

Border Citizens: The Making of Indians, Mexicans, and Anglos in Arizona by Eric V. Meeks (review)

Border Citizens: The Making of Indians, Mexicans, and Anglos in Arizona. By Eric V. Meeks. (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2007. Pp. 342. Illustrations, maps, figures, notes, selected bibliography, index. ISBN 978-0-29271-699-5. $24.95, paper.) Eric Meeks’s first book is one of the most interesting and insightful works in either American Indian or Latino history I have seen for some time. In spite of the title, Meeks largely does not give us a broad survey of the experiences of all Indians, Mexicans, and Anglos in Arizona, but focuses on those instances where the racial definitions as they relate to citizenship were being contested. He especially focuses on the Yaqui and O’odham peoples. This is welcome. While the Yaqui do not suffer from a lack of study, the O’odham definitely do. The deficiency is so great that most of the students whom I taught at Arizona State University had never heard of the O’odham, in spite of many growing up in the same metro area as the Ak Chin and Salt River reservations. Meeks details how, as Arizona fell under U.S. control following the war with Mexico and the Gadsden Purchase, incoming Anglos imposed a racial definition for citizenship. In the debates over statehood, Anglo Arizonans faced an obstacle in the belief held by many whites outside the region that Arizona Territory had too many Mexicans and Indians to be allowed to become a state. White Arizonans reacted by emphasizing their standards of what they perceived western civilization to be, and forced both Mexicans and Indians to live up to racialized definitions, which affected citizenship, language, and even agriculture. European Americans were at the same time also arguing amongst themselves defining what “white” meant, since many eastern and southern European immigrants themselves faced suspicions from the more established descendants of European immigrants from northern and western Europe. Both the O’odham and the Yaqui were seen as more agricultural and sedentary , thus more allegedly civilized by white standards. Yaquis, as simultaneously indigenous and immigrants from Mexico, challenged Anglo notions of “Indian” and in turn even debated amongst themselves whether they were more Mexican than Indian, or some combination of the two. The border had split the O’odham nation. Later the BIA imposed a tribal government that replaced village councils of male elders, causing many O’odham to redefine themselves more as a nation than as members of autonomous villages. State authorities even used a racial basis for decisions governing water use, diverting water from O’odham lands, forcing them to shift from subsistence agriculture to wage labor and seasonal migrant farm work. Intermarriage and the adoption of many Mexican customs by both O’odham and Yaqui, such as the Catholic faith, compadrazgo (godparenting ), and devotion to patron saints and festival days led many whites to argue as recently as the 1980s that Yaquis were not truly Indian. The place of Mexicans and the choice made by Mexican/Hispano leaders to claim to be white has already been covered extensively in other works, as has a growing body of literature studying whiteness. Wisely, Meeks chooses to limit the focus solely to Arizonans’ interactions with the groups whose racial categories were the most under dispute. One of the questions I would have liked answered 2009 Book Reviews 335 *jan 09 11/26/08 12:00 PM Page 335 was the place of the Cocopah during these struggles, another Native people split by the border. But this is an extremely minor quibble. Meeks’s work is a welcome study of how Natives, Latinos, and whites come to be viewed as such, a useful work for anyone in multicultural studies, critical race theory, or southwestern history. Alamo Community College District Al Carroll Iron Horse Imperialism: The Southern Pacific of Mexico, 1880–1951. By Daniel Lewis. (Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 2007. Pp. 196. Illustrations, map, notes, bibliography, index. ISBN 0-81652-604-4. $35.00, cloth.) This well-researched book makes use of previously untapped archival material to offer a detailed picture of the day-to-day operations of the Southern Pacific of Mexico, as well as insight into the interactions between United States companies...

Forecasting urban growth across the United States–Mexico border

The sister-city area of Nogales, Arizona, and Nogales, Sonora, Mexico, is known collectively as Ambos (both) Nogales. This area was historically one city and was administratively divided by the Gadsden Purchase in 1853. These arid-lands have limited and sensitive natural resources. Environmental planning can support sustainable development to accommodate the predicted influx of population. The objective of this research is to quantify the amount of predicted urban growth for the Ambos Nogales watershed to support future planning for sustainable development. Two modeling regimes are explored. Our goal is to identify possible growth patterns associated with the twin-city area as a whole and with the two cities modeled as separate entities. We analyzed the cross-border watershed using regression analysis from satellite images from 1975, 1983, 1996, and 2002 and created urban area classifications. We used these classifications as input to the urban growth model, SLEUTH, to simulate likely patterns of development and define projected conversion probabilities. Model results indicate that the two cities are undergoing very different patterns of change and identify locations of expected growth based on historical development. Growth in Nogales, Arizona is stagnant while the urban area in Nogales, Sonora is exploding. This paper demonstrates an application that portrays how future binational urban growth could develop and affect the environment. This research also provides locations of potential growth for use in city planning.

Santa Anna of Mexico (review)

Reviewed by: Santa Anna of Mexico Pedro Santoni Santa Anna of Mexico. By Will Fowler. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2007. ISBN 978-0-8032-1120-9. Illustrations. Notes. Bibliography. Index. Pp. xxvi, 501. $45.00. During the past decade or so I have appraised several of Will Fowler’s books about nineteenth-century Mexico, but the work under review, which aims to “understand [General Antonio López de] Santa Anna in as sober, detached, and balanced a way as possible” (p. xi), is by far his finest. This superb monograph should go a long way toward stamping out the still-dominant perception of Santa Anna as the individual responsible for all the calamities that befell early republican Mexico Many aspects of Fowler’s book make it noteworthy, but given space limitations I will mention but three. First, he demonstrates the significance of Santa Anna’s relationship with elites and commoners in the region of Veracruz. The personal, political, and economic ties that he established, as well as his success as a major landowner, allowed him to consolidate his status as a regional strongman and helped him gain national prominence. Second, Fowler places Santa Anna’s supposed political opportunism in historical context. He shows that as early as 1828 Santa Anna had carved out a role as “an impartial mediator” who represented a “standpoint that was above factional interests” (p. 108). This stance served him well during his long career in the public eye, particularly as he cemented his ties with the army and tried to turn the military into an institution solely devoted to Mexico and above any kind of political infighting. Third, Fowler convincingly dismisses the charges of treason that have been leveled against Santa Anna over the years. He demonstrates that Santa Anna’s military failures during the Texas revolution of 1835–1836 and the war with the United States in 1846–1848, as well as his subsequent decisions to favor a monarchy and to acquiesce to the Gadsden Purchase, need to be understood within the circumstances that Santa Anna faced at those particular moments. Fowler’s meticulous research effort helped him unveil new perspectives and unearthed nuggets of information that allowed him to better contextualize previously known facts and/or events. For instance, the information he garnered from several repositories in Veracruz enabled Fowler to shed new light on Santa Anna’s activities in that region. He also conversed with the local historian from the town of Xico, who offered a different take on the well-known story about the Indians who early in January 1845 attempted to cook Santa Anna alive. Fowler too gained access to Mexico’s Archivo de la Defensa Nacional. This archive yielded numerous new details about the caudillo’s life as well as the minutes of a May 20, 1847 meeting in which nearly all high-ranking Mexican generals decided to continue the war with the U.S. The document, as Fowler puts it, illustrates “the reasons used by Mexico’s top [military] brass to explain the U.S. victories” until that time (p. 270). Fowler has produced an elegantly-written and engaging study about one of Mexico’s most notorious and misunderstood leaders. His evenhanded assessment of Santa Anna as more than just a power-hungry, opportunistic, and corrupt politician makes this biography a most welcome and valuable addition to Mexican historiography. [End Page 954] Pedro Santoni California State University San Bernardino, California Copyright © 2008 The Society for Military History

"None Excel Them in Virtue and Honesty": Ecclesiastical and Military Descriptions of the Gila River Pima, 1694-1848

Between 1694 and 1848 a medley of ecclesiastical and military chroniclers attempted to describe—through their own cultural lenses and with the inherent biases that come with them—an emerging and dynamic cultural adaptation occurring among the Gila River Pima, or the Akimel O'otham—the "River People." While Pima culture was by no means static prior to 1694, it was less so after that date. A number of important changes were documented, including the adaptation to new crops and new growing patterns. Villages clustered together more than before—although the east-west anchor villages of Chukma Shugthagi (Blackwater) and Komatke remained largely intact—and other Piman groups, including some of those in the San Pedro Valley (Sobaipuris) and in the Santa Cruz Valley (Koahadk), consolidated among the Gila Pima. Core cultural values, however, such as industriousness, virtue, and honesty did not change as they were deeply embedded in the Akimel O'otham tradition.1 The spatial parameter of 1694–1848 is somewhat arbitrary and fo-cuses solely on the early historic period. It begins with the arrival of the Jesuit priest Francisco Eusebio Kino on the Gila River and the first recorded observations of the Pima. The outside parameter closes at 1848, which parallels with the end of the Mexican War and the de facto cessation of Mexican administration on the Gila. While the Gadsden Purchase followed in 1855 and brought all of modern Arizona south of the Gila under U.S. administration, the California forty-niner emigration of 1849–1851 so thoroughly saturated the villages with American trade goods that the Pima villages were effectively under American influences. [End Page 24] The Setting There are no tribes of Indians on the continent of North America more deserving of the attention of philanthropists than those of which I am speaking (Pima and Maricopa). None have [sic] ever been found further advanced in the arts and habits of civilized life. None exhibit a more peaceful disposition or greater simplicity of character, and certainly none excel them in virtue and honesty. John Russell Bartlett, U.S.-Mexico Boundary Commissioner, 18522 Six years before Bartlett's description of the Pima (and their Maricopa neighbors), Brigadier General Stephen Watts Kearny led the U.S. Army of the West down the Gila River valley into the Pima villages, telling chief Antonio Culo Azul he "had heard a great deal of the Pimos [sic] and knew them to be a good people."3 Lieutenant Colonel Philip St. George Cooke, leading the Mormon Battalion to the villages from the south some six weeks behind Kearny, expressed great pleasure upon meet-ing the Indians about whom he had heard so much. Greeting Azul, Cooke remarked he was pleased to meet such a "great friend of the Americans."4 The Gila River, at different times labeled the Rio Grande, Rio de hila, Rio Grande de hila, Rio Azul, Rio de los Santos Apostoles, Rio del Nombre de Jesus, the River of Hila, the Jila, hee-la, Helay, Xila, and Jee-la, was simply called Akimel ("River") or Keli Akimel ("Old Man River") by the Pima. The river was the socioeconomic lifeline of the people, with its waters embodying the very life and essence of the Pima, as the Spaniards called the Akimel O'otham. With its waters, the Pima cultivated a variety of crops to sustain a salubrious diet and economy in the midst of an otherwise inhospitable desert. With its waters, a remarkably stable village-based culture flourished. Without the river the social, cultural, spiritual, and economic welfare of the people would be imperiled.5 Written accounts of the agricultural skill, settled nature, and moral fortitude of the Pima abound, extending back to 1694 when Kino made the first recorded observations of the Indians. These accounts, like those of eighteenth-century Franciscan priest...

The Transformation of a Landscape: Culture and Ecology in Southeastern Arizona

Soujtheastern Arizona hosts one of the most unique and ecologically diverse landscapes in America. It is the meeting place of four major North American bioregions: the Sonoran and Chihuahuan deserts, and the Rocky Mountain and Sierra Madrean forests. Each of these reaches the limits of its range in southeastern Arizona. The mountains and valleys here contain a rich, unparalleled mix of plant and animal species, attracting the attention of biologists from all over the world.' In the past one hundred years, however, the landscape has undergone significant changes, both physically and culturally, Following United States acquisition of this territory in 1853 (the Gadsden Purchase), Anglo-Americans slowly but steadily established hegemony over the land and its indigenous inhabitants, the Chiricahua Apache, displacing both a culture and an ecology. Coveting the rich natural resources, armed with powerful technologies, and motivated by a belief in their destiny to conquer and civilize the wilderness, the new American culture occupied and radically transformed the landscape. Scientists now judge the huge scale of ecological alterations that occurred in southern Arizona during the late 19th and early 20th centuries as comparable in scope to those that occurred during the late pleistocene.2 From almost any perspective these changes proved undesirable: An indigenous people lost their land and way of life; a healthy, stable environment deteriorated; and the natural resource productivity of the land significantly declined. Climatic factors played some role (the region's climate appears to have become

Catalog of the Lichens of Arizona

Altogether 615 epithets of lichens are reported for Arizona. After the list is reduced by removing synonyms and misidentifications, 474 taxa remain -432 species in 78 genera, 2 subspecies, 16 varieties, and 19 forms. The catalog is based on reports in 92 papers. Although there is no adequate lichen flora for the Southwest, the recently published catalogs for Colorado (Shushan & Anderson, 1969) and New Mexico (Egan, 1972a) and the following catalog for Arizona document the reported lichen flora for the southern Rocky Mountain region. The most extensive lichen studies for Arizona were published subsequent to 1950; these include Darrow's (1950) study of the corticolous lichens of southeastern Arizona, Weber's (1963) study of the lichens of the Chiricahua Mountains, Johnsen's (1965a) report on the lichens of Oak Creek Canyon and Wetmore's (1970) study of the Heppiaceae. Recently the senior author collected extensively across the state and added 84 species to the published reports (Nash, 1973b; Nash & Weber, 1974). The major collections of Arizonan lichens are located in the Arizona State University Herbarium and the University of Colorado Museum. The land which now comprises Arizona was acquired from Mexico by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848 and by the Gadsden Purchase in 1853. Initially the area was incorporated as part of the New Mexico Territory, but in 1863 it became a separate territory. In 1912 statehood was obtained. Arizona's approximate boundaries are meridians 31 and 37 degrees north latitude and 109 and 114 degrees longitude. The total area of this approximately rectangular state is 113,909 square miles. Physiographically Arizona is divided by the Mogollon Rim into the Colorado Plateau Province to the north and the Basin and Range Province to the south (Fenneman, 1931). The Colorado Plateau which lies between 5000 and 10,000 feet is generally composed of sedimentary sandstones; the Basin and Range Province is largely composed of rocks of volcanic origin. The highest point in the state is Humphrey's Peak at 12,670 feet; the lowest point is at the southwestern corner at 100 feet. Climatically Arizona is characterized by sharply contrasting seasons (Sellers, 1960). Precipitation occurs predominantly in winter and summer and drought characterizes spring and fall. Annual precipitation varies from less than 5 inches in the southwestern deserts to over 45 inches along the Mogollon Rim and in the White Mountains. Yearly fluctuations in temperature are up to 1000F and daily fluctuations frequently exceed

The Melting Pot that Wouldn't: Ethnic Groups in the American Southwest Since 1846

In 1846, General Stephen Watts Kearny and about three hundred dragoon, of his Army of the West rode into Santa Fe to lay claim to New Mexico on behalf of the United States, a claim legalized two years later, in 1848, by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. Along with i t went most of what is now the southwestern United States, en larged to its present boundaries th rough the ratification in 1854 of the Gadsden Purchase. Kearny and his men were Johnnies-comelately, and most of us who live in the Southwest today, who are the more-or-less direct beneficiaries of this military and political conquest, a re not the descendants of southwestern pioneers, explorers, and discoverers. The New Mexico and Arizona of the midnineteenth century had been discovered and thoroughly explored at least twelve thousand years earl ier by American Indians. When manifest destiny caught up with the region's real pioneer inhabitants, they numbered in the many thousands; they spoke more than twenty languages, many of which were mutually unintelligible and totally unrelated; they lived in compact pueblo villages or in temporary camps characteristic of seminomads; and, depending on environmental or other factors, they farmed, hunted, gathered, and engaged in extensive foreign trade as means of earning their livelihoods . l In 1846, moreover, northwestern Mexico was occupied also by native-born speakers of Spanish, some of whom were the direct lineal descendants of late-sixteenth -, seventeenth-, and eighteenth-century colonists of ultimate European origin, but most of whom were more genuinely Mexican. That is, they

Bartlett’s West: Drawing the Mexican Boundary by Robert V. Hine

168 Western American Literature Bartlett’s West: Drawing the Mexican Boundary. By Robert V. Hine. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1968, 155 pages, illustrations.) John Russell Bartlett was not a very likely candidate for commissioner of the Mexican Boundary Survey of 1850. He was not a surveyor, he had never commanded as large and diverse a party as the commission, and much of his knowledge of the southwestern United States was from the popular stories of Davy Crockett and similar writings. Bartlett was at home in the literary circles of Boston and New York, and his western experience was con­ fined mainly to western New York and the Canadian shore of Lake Ontario. His appointment seemed even more incongruous because of his recent strong resistance to the annexation of Texas and outspoken opposition to the Mexican War and territorial acquisition. On the other hand, Bartlett was a self-made intellectual with wide ranging interests. His publications and scholarly activities earned him an honorary Master of Arts degree from Brown University, and 18 years in the Canadian wilderness had whetted his interest in the challenges of the frontier. Like Francis Parkman, he was a loyal easterner who relished the opportunity to observe the Indians in their natural habitat. Bartlett’s desire to leave his New York bookstore, the vacancy in the commissionership post, and some well-placed friends in the right places, combined to win him the appointment. Robert Hine’s balanced study of Bartlett and his brief period on the Mexican boundary admirably describes the frustrations and accomplishments of the commissioner. As Hine points out, Bartlett’s three years with the survey was a tiny segment of his long eventful life, and would probably have gone unnoticed had it not been for the publication of his Personal Narrative. Bartlett endured innumerable hardships, misunderstandings, problems with fellow members of the commission, and political maneuverings in order to carry out his assignment and leave a rich body of information about the new land, including many very valuable drawings and paintings. Some of the fifty-six illustrations impressively reproduced by Hine did not appear in earlier published works. Although Bartlett’s efforts were largely obscured by the Gadsden Purchase and new boundary reports of William Emory, Hine places Bartlett’s work in proper perspective. He points out that because of Bartlett’s skill as an ob­ server, writer, and artist, his Narrative became an invaluable source of in­ formation for those who developed the newly acquired region. He suggests that had Bartlett been appointed after the Gadsden Purchase, his writings would be regarded much more highly than those of Emory, and his art would stand beside that of other better known western artists. Controversy over Bartlett’s management of the commission and his Reviews 169 stubborn support of the disputed Bartlett-Cond6 line raged high at the time of his dismissal. Hine believes that Bartlett and his friends on the commission were never given the opportunity to bring their studies to an appropriate conclusion, and that faced with controversy and lack of support, their efforts were the more remarkable. Hine’s work is a significant contribution to literature on the South­ western boundary as well as that about Bartlett himself. It is concise, well documented, and contains useful bibliographical information, in addition to inclusion of the extremely important illustrations. The book is somewhat ungainly because of the dimensions of the illustrations, but this is compensated by the fact that they may be viewed without turning the book on its side to study them. The plates are misnumbered beginning with number 37 (which is actually number 48), but this is a minor mechanical difficulty which in no way detracts from the excellent quality of Hine’s work. Kenneth H ufford, Principia College The Southwest: Old and New. By W. Eugene Hollon. (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1968. 487 pages, $2.95.) W. Eugene Hollon’s The Southwest: Old and New, first published by Alfred A. Knopf in 1961, has been newly printed as a Bison Book by the University of Nebraska Press, with a foreword by Joe B. Frantz of the Uni­ versity of Texas. To designate a particular section of the United States...

The Skirmish of Picacho

The author, a recent doctoral graduate of Louisiana State University, is working on a study of the Confederacy in the Southwest. He ? Assistant Professor of Social Science at Arkansas Agricultural and Mechanical College. The Skirmish of Picacho MARTIN HARDWICK HALL at the outbreak of the civil war New Mexico was a vast territory which consisted roughly of the present-day states of Arizona and New Mexico. For several years the people living in the Gadsden Purchase area, commonly called Arizona, had been unsuccessfully agitating for separate territorial status.1 Within a few weeks after the formation of the Confederate States of America, the Anglo-Saxon element of Arizona, largely Southern in origin,* held "secession" conventions in Mesilla and Tucson. Both bodies voted in favor of separation from New Mexico and attachment to the newly created Confederacy.8 During the first week of July, 1861, Lieutenant Colonel John R. Baylor, commanding a detachment of about 375 mounted men, occupied Fort Bliss, Texas, for the Confederacy. Forty miles to the north, in New Mexico, lay Fort Fillmore, which was held by a much larger force of Union troops. In a brief campaign, Baylor succeeded in capturing the whole enemy garrison , thereby bringing practically all of southern New Mexico under Confederate military control.* Shortly, Baylor gave expression to the desires of the populace by creating the Confederate Territory of Arizona. In anticipation of approval from Richmond, Baylor assumed the office of governor and designated Mesilla the territorial capital.5 1 Hubert H. Bancroft, History of Arizona and New Mexico, /530-/888 (San Francisco: The Hickory Co, 1889), pp. 504-8. 2 Loomis M. Ganaway, New Mexico and the Sectional Controversy, 1846-1861 (Albuquerque : University of New Mexico Press, 1944), pp. 107-8. s Bancroft, op. cit., p. 511; Mailla [N. Mex.] Times, March 30, 1861. * Baylor to Washington, September 21, 1861, The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1880-1901), Ser. I, Vol. 4, pp. 16ff.; hereinafter cited as O.R., followed by the series number in roman numerals, the volume number In arable, the part number (¡f any), and the page, as O.R., I, 4, pp. 16ff. 8 Proclamation to the People of the Territory of Arizona, August 1, 1861, OJJ., Ì, 4, pp. 20-21. 27 28MARTINHARDWICKHALL Baylor's campaign proved to be only a preliminary, for Confederate plans soon called for far more than just the annexation of Arizona. During the month of December, 1861, General Henry Hopkins Sibley arrived with a brigade of mounted troops.6 His immediate objective was to defeat the remaining Union armies in northern New Mexico and to bring all the territory under Southern authority. But he did not intend to stop here, for his ultimate aim was the conquest of California. Sibley knew that there were many in southern California who espoused Confederate sympathies. He believed that once he secured New Mexico (and possibly Colorado), his army could easily penetrate southern California. With his brigade augmented by volunteers from that quarter, he felt that he would be able to overcome the Federal forces in the northern part of the state.7 It is true that Sibley's plan was largely visionary, but the importance of conquering California for the Confederacy goes without saying. * * * General Edwin V. Sumner, the Union commander of the Department of the Pacific,8 was concerned about internal dissension in California, for apparently a large portion of the population of the southern part of that state was pro-Confederate. As a security measure Sumner saw to it that many of the volunteer military units which were being raised in the north were stationed in that "disaffected" area.9 Meanwhile, the Union high command in Washington instructed Sumner to raise an expeditionary force in California which would embark from San Francisco, proceed by water to Mexico, and then march overland "to regain the public property in . . . [Texas] and draw off insurgent troops from Arkansas, Missouri," and elsewhere .10 Permission to cross Mexican soil was obtained from the national Mexican government and from the governors of the states involved.11 As Sumner was in the midst of carrying out...

The Origins of the McLane–Ocampo Treaty of 1859

The treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848 acquired for the United States one-half of Mexican territory, while the Gadsden Purchase of 1853 secured a more level route for railroads destined to connect the south and the far west. Impatient investors, however, sought immediate union with the west, and the shortest route at hand was across the isthmus of Tehuantepec in southern Mexico. The Department of State advanced these interests, and only on failure turned their efforts to an overland route across Northern Mexico. This latter route would have connected Matamoros on the Rio Grande and Atlantic with Matzatlan on the Pacific. To this goal, Delphy Carlin, an American long-experienced in trade with Mexico, urged Secretary of State Lewis Cass. He was convinced that a line skirting the mountains and connecting these ports would be an ideal boundary; that “all north of that red line is a nuisance to Mexico.”