The northern frontier of New Spain—this new desert into which they ventured—was much more varied than its counterpart in Andalucia and Castile. It had a wider range of altitudes, soils, animal life, drought-resistant vegetation, and even more capricious cycles of annual rainfall. The mountains were more rugged and towering, and the barrancas or canyons more impenetrable.
Michael Meyer, 19841
The term “borderlands” refers to the area that formed the northern border of the Spain’s American empire. Some use the term to describe Spanish claims stretching along the Gulf of Mexico from Florida to Texas and to the states on both sides of the present U. S.—Mexican border. Others restrict the term to the states presently on each side of the U. S.—Mexican border. The area included in this latter definition was administered from Mexico City, explored and settled from Mexico, and traded almost exclusively with Mexico. Even if one restricts the definition of borderlands to the present border states—six in Mexico and four in the United States—the borderlands cover more than 960,000 square miles, an area considerably larger than western Europe.2
Water scarcity limited the possible sites for missions, presidios, towns, and farms. It also placed constraints on travel. For example, the 1775 colonizing expedition that marched overland from Sonora to California had to be divided into three groups so waterholes could refill after the passage of each group. The available water could not support large concentrations of humans and animals. Closely related to water scarcity was low population density. In 1810, Coahuila had six inhabitants per square league, less than 1 percent of the population density of Guanajuato.3
Sheep, cattle, and horses introduced into this arid region trampled grass, or ate it, and made trails. This led to erosion, quicker run-off, and gullying. The gullies carried rainwater away rapidly, rather than letting it soak into the soil. This, in turn, lowered water tables and led to desertification.4
Conflict in the borderlands often revolved around water, not land. As the number of cattle increased, conflict intensified. An eighteenth-century census of the lower Rio Grande valley found that the human population numbered 2,273, compared to a cattle population of 209,000. Conflict occurred not only between species and between ethnic groups, but within them. Spanish clergymen and soldiers each proclaimed their water rights to be supreme. As historian Michael Meyer commented, “Each group rationalized that its own presence was needed to assure the happiness and tranquillity of the surrounding Indian population, but the documentation suggests forcefully that in most cases Indian water interests were served by neither.”5
Borderland settlement occurred after Spain had lost the vigor that had characterized it during the early Conquest period. This led to a chronic shortage of military support and financial subsidy in the distant borderlands. Due to its isolation, neither Mexico City nor Madrid could exercise control over everyday affairs in the north. If an official in Santa Fe wrote his superior in Mexico
City asking for direction, and if the superior answered promptly, the reply would arrive six months later. The same official would usually have to wait a year or longer for a response from Madrid.6
The Spanish borderland population consisted of missionaries, soldiers, and settlers. When their tour of duty ended, many of the soldiers remained and joined the ranks of the settlers, who soon outnumbered both soldiers and missionaries. Unlike his countrymen in central Mexico, a Spaniard in the north could not live from wealth accumulated by Indians. Nor did the scant indigenous population provide a plentiful source of labor as in central Mexico. As a result, as historian Oakah Jones, Jr. commented, “The large majority of the people of the Spanish frontier in the colonial period consisted of real settlers, established in formal communities, and absolutely dependent on tilling the soil and raising livestock for their livelihood.”7
On the frontier, as a result of lax record keeping, mestizos, mulattos, and Hispanized Indians found it rather easy to transcend official racial categories. Indians and mulattos declared themselves to be mestizos, and mestizos to be Spaniards. A priest in Santa Barbara, California, commented on its residents, “Although it is well known that not all are genuine Spaniards, if they were told to the contrary they would consider it an affront.” In Texas, perhaps to avoid giving offense, census takers simply listed all military personnel as “Spaniards,” regardless of their racial origins. “Spanish” became such an elastic term that Texas census reports mention “a Spaniard from Canada,” “a Spaniard from France,” and “a Spaniard from Corsica.” In contrast to central Mexico, continual warfare against Indians gave those with “impurities of blood” the opportunity to distinguish themselves and acquire prestige and status.8
Mixed-bloods from other parts of Mexico, not Spaniards, comprised the majority of the arrivals to the borderlands. Only a third of the men and a fourth of the women who founded San Jose and San Francisco identified themselves as “Spanish.” Only two of the initial forty-six residents of Los Angeles did so.9
World History
