The Mexican Frontier, 1821-1846: The American Southwest Under Mexico. By
David J. Weber. Histories of the American Frontier Series, Ray Allen Billington,
General Editor; Howard R. Lamar, Coeditor. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press,
1982. Bibliography. Illustrations. Index. Maps. 416 Pages. $9.95 paper. $19.95 cloth.
Reviewed by Daniel Tyler, Professor of History, Colorado State University,
Fort Collins, Colorado, who has edited Western American History in the
Seventies (1973)andauthored Red Men and Hat Wearers(1977).
As the title suggests, this volume in the Frontier Series discusses the
history of California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas when these provinces belonged
to Mexico. The author's focus is on the role of the Far North in the Mexican nation
during the turbulent twenty-five years when Mexico began experimenting with a republican
form of government. He concludes that the Mexican frontier was different from the
Anglo-American frontier; that it was more democratic, fluid, and rebellious than other parts
of Mexico; and that the greatest impact on the residents (pobladores) of this region
came from contact with North Americans.
The author's approach is both chronological and topical. Beginning with a
discussion of independence and its impact on the Far North, Weber notes how each
area adjusted to both federalist and centralist systems. Due to controversies in
Mexico City, shifting policies and unstable governments, transitional roles of the
Army and Church, inadequate funding for defense, and the distances and dangers that
lurked between the capital and the frontier, settlers in the Far North soon came
to realize that they were very much on their own. Laws and decrees emanating from
Mexico were often ignored or contradicted by local officials who initiated practices
designed to deal with the needs and desires of their own people.
Although the results of salutary neglect were different in each one of the
borderlands areas, Weber has noted certain similarities in all four: decline of
the presidios and a concomitant rise in the importance of the militia; a desire
for trade with foreigners at the risk of inviting a Trojan horse into their midst;
an increase in Indian belligerence; and a particular sensitivity to appointed
officials who were not residents of the area in which they were to serve.
Weber's narrative is well paced. In addition to the gradual separation developing
between Mexico and the Far North, he describes the life of the pobladores
(Chap. 11), their tribulations with more aggressive North Americans, and their
efforts to ameliorate economic difficulties through trade with the newcomers. The
uniqueness of Weber's approach is that he views these two-and-one-half decades within
the national confines of Mexico's own metamorphosis. He finds explanations for North
American prejudices in our failure to appreciate Mexico's dilemma, and he skillfully
directs the reader toward a more balanced framework for understanding both the clash
of cultures and the frontier process. This is accomplished through analysis of the
individual communities and the region as a whole.
Those interested in California history will find an abundance of detail
regarding Alta California's population growth during this period. While Los
Angeles and San José doubled in size, Santa Barbara and Monterey became "
thriving commercial centers" (p. 227). New communities developed inland
from the coast, partly as a result of North Americans who dominated the area
around Sonoma and who assimilated well into the surrounding environment. With
Bostoneces providing an outlet for wine, tanned hides, and tallow in the
East, agriculture and stock raising remained the principal livelihoods of the
californios who seized mission lands after secularization and manifested a
pronounced hostility toward the dispossessed Indians. Because of the climate and
profits to be made in farming and pastoral pursuits, California was slow to develop
sophisticated urban centers. Political institutions also matured slowly, and a general
apathy existed vis-á-vis politics. Representation in the national congress was delayed
until the 1830s. In general, Weber sees Mexican California as a bucolic environment,
relatively content with the North American population which arrived in its midst, but
fearful of foreign domination. Desirous of more autonomy, californios declined
to embark on a Texas-style revolution, both because of the general apathy of the
pobladores, and because the central government allowed a native son to act as
governor (Juan Bautista Alvarado) when demands for home rule were most strident.
What North Americans failed to learn in 1846 was that californios were still
Mexicans with more than a little nationalism in their cultural baggage.
Critics of Weber's book will wish that he had placed more stress on Indian life,
and that he had explained the reason why the Indo-Hispanic character failed to
produce the same results with democracy and capitalism as did the North Americans.
On the other hand, the author has established an excellent base for the study of
this and other frontiers, and those who read his voluminous footnotes and extensive
bibliography will be aware of the limitations imposed on this synthesis by the
available literature. No one knows it better than Weber. His articles, "
Mexico's Far Northern Frontier, 1821-1854: Historiography Askew" (Western
Historical Quarterly [July 1976], pp. 279-93) and "Mexico's Far Northern
Frontier, 1821-1845: A Critical Bibliography" (Arizona and the West
[Autumn 1977], pp. 225-66) are proof of his mastery of the sources. In addition
to his stimulating synthesis of the Mexican period, students will find in Weber's
book a great many ideas on which to build both a better comprehension of comparative
frontiers and a bridge to better understanding of present relations between Mexico
and the United States.
