Comentario
Angie,
Thank you, I didnt not know this.
~~glo~~
From: "aajay1073" <aajay1073@...>
Reply-To: ranchos@yahoogroups.com
To: ranchos@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [ranchos] Re: Mexican Border
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 21:36:00 -0000
Glo,
Here is some information:
Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Guadalupe_Hildalgo
Maps:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:National-atlas-territorial-
acquisitions.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Territorial-acquisition-uscensus-
bureau.jpg
If the links wrap be sure to recreate in address bar.
- Angie
--- In ranchos@yahoogroups.com, "glo Sandoval-Fuentes"
<gloriafuentes@h...> wrote:
>
> I would like to hear further on this because I always thought that
Mexico
> did own California too, like till the beginning of the 1900's?
>
>
>
> ~~glo~~
>
Yahoo! Groups Links
- Inicie sesión para enviar comentarios
Comentario
When I was in college back in the early '60s, I read a number of old news articles that were written by a California judge in the late 1800s about Mexicans and they were very cruel. You could actually feel the hatred he had for us even back at that time. After the military take over by the Americans of California, life must have been very hard for our people. Freedom does have a price. Alberto Duarte Prieto. Santa Maria, California --- Arturo Ramos <arturo.ramos2@...> wrote: > Ed/Angie: > > Whatever the political status of the American > Southwest was > throughout the 1700s and early 1800s, it was if not > indigenous in > identity, certainly Mexican. Most of the settlers > in the area were > not Spaniards, as a lot of Anglo revisionist > historians like to > purport by glorifying the missions, etc., but > Mexicans... Tlaxacaltec > colonizers in New Mexico, immigrants from Sonora, > Chihuahua, > Aguascalientes, etc... The original founding > families of Culver City, > California, for example were the Talamantes and > Avila from > Aguascalientes... probably related to some people in > the group. > > The following book is very well researched and > provides a whole new > insight into the attempted "de-Mexicanization" of > Los Angeles. A > very good read. > > Whitewashed Adobe : The Rise of Los Angeles and the > Remaking of Its > Mexican Past > by William Deverell > > Review: > > Chronicling the rise of Los Angeles through shifting > ideas of race > and ethnicity, William Deverell offers a unique > perspective on how > the city grew and changed. Whitewashed Adobe > considers six different > developments in the history of the city--including > the cementing of > the Los Angeles River, the outbreak of bubonic > plague in 1924, and > the evolution of America's largest brickyard in the > 1920s. In an > absorbing narrative supported by a number of > previously unpublished > period photographs, Deverell shows how a city that > was once part of > Mexico itself came of age through appropriating--and > even > obliterating--the region's connections to Mexican > places and people. > Deverell portrays Los Angeles during the 1850s as a > city seething > with racial enmity due to the recent war with > Mexico. He explains > how, within a generation, the city's business > interests, looking for > a commercially viable way to establish urban > identity, borrowed > Mexican cultural traditions and put on a carnival > called La Fiesta de > Los Angeles. He analyzes the subtle ways in which > ethnicity came to > bear on efforts to corral the unpredictable Los > Angeles River and > shows how the resident Mexican population was put to > work fashioning > the modern metropolis. He discusses how Los Angeles > responded to the > nation's last major outbreak of bubonic plague and > concludes by > considering the Mission Play, a famed drama tied to > regional > assumptions about history, progress, and ethnicity. > Taking all of > these elements into consideration, Whitewashed Adobe > uncovers an > urban identity--and the power structure that > fostered it--with far- > reaching implications for contemporary Los Angeles. > > > > > --- In ranchos@yahoogroups.com, "aajay1073" > <aajay1073@y...> wrote: > > > > Ed, > > > > Sorry...I have a tendecy to simplfy things and > generalize... I > fully > > understand what you mean. > > > > Thanks, > > Angie > > > > --- In ranchos@yahoogroups.com, "Edward Serros" > <ed@s...> wrote: > > > > > > Angie, > > > > > > As a point of clarification, the independent > country of Mexico > > owned much of the > > > Southwest for only a few decades (1810/1820 time > frame to ~1848). > > Spain owned the > > > Southwest for centuries. The only reason I bring > this up is that > I > > hear the statement that > > > Mexico owned California all the time and I am > not sure people > > remember the dates well or > > > fully understand the entities involved. > > > > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page! http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
- Inicie sesión para enviar comentarios
Comentario
|
"The original founding families of Culver City, California, for example were the Talamantes and Avila from Aguascalientes... probably related to some people in the group". Yes Arturo, There is a Talamantes from Taltenango (where is that? I can't find it in a map) in my husband's lines in the Jalisco records, but his son did not take on his surname. He took on his mother's surname, Cervantes. Do you think he did that because his Talamantes father was indigenous (his father's mother was surnamed Diegina), and it would bode him better if he were known as a Cervantes? Especially if he looked espanol as my husband does? I notice that trend (to take the mother's surname) among the children of many Espanolas who married Indian men with or without surnames. Their races were not noted since this was in 1839 in Encarnacion de Diaz. Emilie Garcia Port Orchard, WA --
|
- Inicie sesión para enviar comentarios

Reply