El jardin de etnobotanico de Oaxaca is home to many indigenous plants that are only found in Oaxaca. Oaxaca has several different types of climates throughout the state. The garden collects several plants that are native to the state of Oaxaca. When a new plant is introduced to the garden, the caretakers of the garden have to make special arrangement to provide an environment the plant can survive in. Their mission is to collect, care for, and learn about every indigenous plant and protect it from extinction.

While visiting the garden, people have the option of learning about plants that can be used as medicine, visiting the greenhouse, visiting the local library or checking out the seed bank. The garden was opened in 1998, and now it's home to about 800 different plants. With the help of Fransisco Toledo, a famous Mexican artist, who made a large donation to the garden and even designed the greenhouse. His mission was to make the garden an ecofriendly habitat people can go to and study all the different types of plants there are.

The garden has many types of plants that were used in Mesoamerica during the time of Mayas, Zapotecs and Mixtecs. Most civilizations have a person they go to when they are not feeling well. For modern people, it would mean that it's time to go see a doctor. However for other civilizations, such as the Mesoamerican civilizations, they go see a variety of people such as hueseros (who gives massages and relaxes the bones), herbalists/yerberos (who use plants to make medicine for the ill), limpiadores/curandero (who clean the body using utensils like a broom or egg), or chupadores (who suck the illness or poison of an injury). These are also some practices that many Mayan civilizations believed in. When someone from the civilization got ill people believed he was being punished for something he did and the gods did not like. At that point, it was time for an ill person to confront the sickness.

However, when things got worse, the most practiced method that was used, and is still being used, was to go see an herbalist. The garden cultivates many different plants that were used in Mesoamerica at the time. For instance, nopal de lenguita they grinded the cactus until it became an edible drink. Indigenous people of Mesoamerica could drink it if they were suffering from skin problems. Till this day, many people in Mexico still use herbs instead of medicine to help them get better. Most of the plants could be are found in the garden or the library's garden. In some Mesoamerica civilizations, they used Chaya de monte to get rid of kidney stones, flor de San Diego used to eliminate dysentery (intense diarrhea), and makulan (to speed up a birth). In Becán there was a plant called Chakah that was boiled and put on people who suffered from skin problems. In Calakmul, there´s a plant called piperaci that was boiled and used to put on sore muscles to help relax the body.

The garden is a beautiful place to go visit in Oaxaca if one is interested in learning about all different types of plants. People can also learn about indigenous people and how their cultures treated the sick with plants. The garden is also a beautiful setting for holding weddings and other special events. Local students also go to the garden to study and learn about all the different types of plants. If a person is interested they need to book a tour and visit.

For more (including 6 images) view the original article

Music, one can argue, is a necessary form of cultural expression regardless of how it is performed or practiced. In the Chicana/o movement, the music that has gradually evolved holds a substantial presence in America. While some scholars view the cultural adjustment made by the Chicanas/os as a case of an ethnically unique group losing its culture to a larger, monolithic mainstream culture, scholars such as George Lipsitz argue on the contrary. Referring to the Chicanas/os, Lipsitz says, “Unable to experience either simple assimilation or complete separation from dominant groups; minorities accustom themselves to a bifocality that reflects both the way that they are viewed by others.”[1] Rather than outright rejecting or adopting mainstream practices, Lipsitz views chicana/o music as toeing the line between both sides, embracing mainstream forms of music in the United States while still finding ways in which they could express their own culture. Understanding the evolution of the different eras of Chicana/o music is essential because, to quote Chicana scholar/musician Martha Gonzalez, “...takes its cues from its radical predecessors and yet is precisely distinct by the ways in which members have utilized their artistic and creative abilities to develop participatory, process-based community art practices-that is to say, approaches to art and music that focus on relationships and process rather than outcomes and products.” [2] This paper aims to analyze how Chicana/o Americans have inhabited the US music scene inhabiting their unique identities, allowing them to acknowledge the land they inhabit while also recognizing the cultural heritage that raised them.

Chicana/o music of the Late 20th Century

The definition that Gonzalez provides, one that emphasizes musical performance as an experience over a commercialized product, is critical to note because the purpose of performing music will deviate from the mainstream culture of both the US and Mexico cultures, in that the musicians of the movement are focused more on expression and experimentation rather than appeasing mainstream audiences. Gonzalez emphasizes the Época de Oro del cine Mexicano as an influence on the audience’s expectations through her father’s efforts to push her brother into stardom. Notably, for lower economic classes, Gonzalez says, all the pieces in performance, dress, staging, etc., are towards achieving professional status rather than a form of expression. “Western perspectives on music practice are inextricably infused with ideas of professionalization and upward economic and social mobility. I can see how the power and prestige of being a ‘professional singer’ was the only way my father could visualize participation in a music world,” [3] Orquestas like the Texas-based GGs, who initially performed for lower- and middle-class Tejano and Norteño audiences in the Southwest, were creatively limited to performing standard música de cantina for these crowds, despite a desire to incorporate other music genres into their repertoire like jazz. [4] The GGs would progressively gain more artistic control by the 1960s, but their efforts highlight the initial struggle that Chicana/o artists had in being able to express their message. As time progresses, Chicana/o artists begin to progressively focus on personal expression, eventually finding mainstream success beyond their local neighborhoods. [5]

By the 1970s, the central musica moderna was evolving, and the music of the Chicano movement would begin to thrive through changing sounds. A decade after the passing of Ritchie Valens in 1959, a new wave of Chicanos would continue to push Chicano-influenced art to the mainstream, presenting music that was more direct in expressing their heritage. A Los Angeles band of Chicanos known as The V.I.P.s, empowered after performing a cover “Viva Tirado” about a Mexican bullfighter, renamed their group El Chicano, gaining popularity for their Latin-jazz fused sounds and bringing Chicano rock to the mainstream nationwide while expressing their proud heritage through their performance and their identity as a group. [6] Meanwhile, two guitar-playing brothers in San Francisco would play significant roles in furthering Chicano music history. One brother, Carlos Santana, would find mainstream success as the leader of the band Santana, achieving highlights such as performing at the famed Woodstock festival in 1969, and massive crossover success. [7] Jorge, on the other hand, would work as the guitarist for the band Malo, eventually writing the song Suavecito, considered by some to be the Chicano National Anthem. [8] It is the sound that Jorge produced through this song that many members of the Chicana/o movement hold dear, noting that Jorge is, “one of the architects of a truly American sound, Chicano rock…” “Jorge came here from Mexico and not only made this his adopted country and culture, but he also helped establish a Chicano culture for the generations that came after him and even created an anthem for us…” [9] Compared to the mainstream success of Carlos, what Jorge produced is seen as a vital representation of the Chicano movement at a very crucial time, “Released at a time when Chicanos were struggling for basic rights and recognition in the U.S., “Suavecito” is a symbol of unity still widely played and enjoyed today.” [10] The music of Chicanas/os of the 1970s holds different expectations than groups like the early orquestas. The groups of this time are producing music that distinctly represents the binational identity of this movement, presenting art that while still finding mainstream success at times with groups such as El Chicano and the Santanas, was being made to represent the Chicana/o identity. [11]

The 1980s saw the period of Chicano music in which scholars like George Lipsitz dedicated more time, as this is where Lipsitz discusses the complex expression that Chicana/o music takes on. Bands like Los Lobos present the form of Chicana/o art that Lipsitz referred to as a “bifocality,” [12] in some ways summarizing the chicana/o music timeline to that point. Beginning as a band making a living performing traditional folk songs like the early orquestas, eventually starting to find mainstream success through their brand of rock and roll music like El Chicano and the Santanas, in Los Lobos’ case opening for international bands like The Clash. Lipsitz continues, “But Los Angeles Chicano rock-and-roll artists have selected another path. They have tried to straddle the line between the two cultures (Anglo and Chicano), creating a fusion music that resonates with the chaos and costs of cultural collision.” [13] The work that Los Lobos made was the next step in the evolution of the Chicano rock band. While bands like Malo and El Chicano produced Chicana/o-centric music, sometimes with a potential for mainstream success, Los Lobos uses their Chicana/o lifestyles to contribute a unique music performance to a broader, anglicized genre in the United States. [14]

Reaching mainstream success would not be the end of Chicana/o music’s evolution. By the 1990s, as alternative music is gaining prominence and mainstream success, Chicana/o artists in Los Angeles begin to create their form of Chicana/o alternative that incorporates traits from all of their predecessors. This period is a significant time to embrace their tradition, the neighborhood of East LA no longer resembles the predominantly Chicana/o population, and the work of these new bands, under a stronger Chicana/o identity, is impacting more than the Chicana/o neighborhoods. Bands like Ozomatli and Quetzal (led by Martha Gonzalez) boldly emphasize their heritage, using imagery and language from ancient civilizations and native tribes. Beyond music performance, the alternative bands of the 90s also are notable for their vocal activism for chicana/o issues that bleed into other social fields such as worker’s rights. “Rather than a politics of ‘either/or’ that asks people to choose between culture and politics, between class and race, or between distinct national identities, this cultural movement embraces a politics of ‘both/and’ that encourages dynamic, fluid, and flexible stances and identity categories.” [15] The Chicana/o bands of this era, rather than focusing their work exclusively on their communities, begin to address the intersectionality of issues that affect Chicanas/os and other groups in neighboring communities, reflecting the changing demographics. Unable to hide in a bubble, the new Chicana/o bands of the 1990s choose to make inclusiveness a part of their effort.

Conclusion

Chicana/o music and its associated movements are still evolving in the 2000s. Through the razabilly movement that engages Chicanas/os with Rockabilly, we see another form of movement that, as happened with bands like Los Lobos and Santana, challenges the assumption “...that there are forms of music, styles of dress, and other cultural texts that are naturally Latino and others that are not.” [16] This statement summarizes the movement of Chicana/o music beginning in the latter half of the 20th Century. This complex group evolved over the decades, taking on different aspects of Central American and the United States heritage. Far from finished with that, the timeline of Chicana/o music also highlights the vast array of issues taken on by artists within the movement, moving beyond cultural identity and embracing social issues non-exclusive to themselves. Understanding the complex characteristics that make up Chicana/o provides a baseline understanding of the movement and its people, showing that understanding the musicians participating in this music can help understand how complex the Chicana/o identity is.

For more (including 5 images) view the original article

Rage Against the Machine is a rock band based out of Southern California that consists of vocalist Zack de la Rocha, guitarist Tom Morello, bassist Tim Commerford, and drummer Brad Wilk.[1] The four members combine strong music with heavy rhythms, accompanied by de la Rocha’s politically inspired lyrics capable of resonating with discontent individuals and alternative movements.[2] The band has described themselves as the expression of frustration with entities that include corporate firms, systems of government, and the media.[3] De la Rocha’s trips to Chiapas, Mexico go back to the early 1900s and have informed his lyrics to express unrest from first-hand experience among the Zapatistas.

De la Rocha’s interviews with newspapers and magazine journalists have repeatedly discussed details on his trips to Chiapas; one instance, he discussed working with and marching alongside peasants during his visits. De la Rocha joined Zapatistas by being part of a human chain that surrounded a building where Zapatista leaders met with the Mexican government. He even attributes picking up his smoking habit as a conversation starter while in Chiapas.[4] In 1995 and 1996 respectively, he witnessed peace negotiations between the two parties and experienced starvation alongside peasants as the Mexican army blockaded the village from the cornfields.[5]

The Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional movement (EZLN) in Chiapas, Mexico has historical ties that draw inspiration from the 1870s. The national government and landowners have long been exploiting indigenous communities through schemes like enganche, or “hook” systems, which gave indigenous people advanced loans, knowing they were unable to pay them back. Unrest among the indigenous populations of El Norte (the North), Los Altos (the Central Highlands), and the Selva Lacandona (the Lacandon Jungle or Rainforest), has inspired them to create the EZLN. Officially founded in the early 1980s, the EZLN has targeted exposing their oppressors, educating the people of the countryside, and demanding livable conditions. As recent as 1994, the EZLN took up arms in a series of confrontations with the Mexican government in San Cristóbal de las Casas, Altamirano, Las Margaritas, Huixtán, Ocosingo, Oxchuc, and Chanal. During these uprisings, the EZLN demanded “work, land, shelter, food, health, education, independence, democracy, justice, and peace;” as a result, the series of clashes lasted ten days and caused up to 120 deaths from both sides.[6]

The EZLN has had prominent voices birthed from their movement like Subcommandante Marcos. His detailed writings inform others of the oppression his people face at the hands of the government and big businesses. He explains how its natural resources are exploited in return for nothing to its farmers. For instance, two-thirds the avocados, sixty-nine percent the cocoa, and half the corn produced in Chiapas goes to the national market. All while eighty percent of their people go hungry. Only oil companies and foreigners can cut down trees; otherwise, Chiapans are penalized a fee worth ten day’s salary plus jail time. Half of Mexico’s hydroelectric power comes from Chiapas, yet only one-third of Chiapan homes have electricity. He also goes on to mention that half the schools do not go higher than the third grade; seventy-two percent of children do not finish the first grade as most enter the exploited workforce to help their families survive. His writings have illuminated to outsiders why a revolution is necessary for the muted and exploited Chiapan voices.[7]

The connection between de la Rocha and the Zapatistas has created a bridge to show how connected we all still are, even if we are nations apart. This is visible through his lyrics in songs, for example, “Without A Face” and “Wind Below,” which both appear on the album Evil Empire (1996). De la Rocha writes:

“Maize was all we needed to sustain,

Now her golden skin burns, insecticide rain,

Down with DDT, yeah you know me,

I'm raped for the grapes, profit for the bourgeoisie”

These lyrics convey the exploitation of Chiapan agricultural resources at the hands of the national government. De la Rocha has also directly utilized words from Subcommandante Marcos’s “wind below” essay, giving birth to Zapatista phrases such as “we are the wind below” that re-emphasize the grassroots struggle experienced by Zapatistas: [8]

“Yes, rebel of tha grains stand masterless,

Tha masked ones cap one,

NAFTA comin' with tha new disaster”

He has also taken advantage of opportunities to educate others through supplementary mediums at his disposal. One example was interviewing political scholar and activist, Noam Chomsky, current professor at MIT and expert in globalization. During the interview, they discuss the North American Free Trade Agreement and the abolishment of Mexico’s Constitution of Article 27, which assured that Mexico’s poor farmers could own land.[9] These two topics continue to impact Zapatistas today.

Rage Against The Machine has successfully lifted the voices of an invisible group by connecting the Zapatistas to rock. More specifically, de la Rocha’s visits to Chiapas have inspired his passionate writing as he understands their struggle. The foundation of rock music is a form of rebellion, making the marriage between the two groups consistent and meaningful.

For more (including 5 images) view the original article

Celebrated Mexican painter Diego Rivera transcribed the history of Mexico in a mural in his own style of painting on the main staircase of the National Palace of Mexico City. The staircase leads to the second floor of the courtyard which still houses the main offices of government entities of Mexico. Mexico is a country that has experienced various revolutions throughout its history and the mural tells the story of them all, even the indigenous beginnings. The Mexican government craved a change in their style of leadership. Leadership pushed for a mural and art movement throughout the country. The government shifted from the ideologist of the nineteenth century into a modern political and social model. Soon after, the first president during this period encourage education and cultural propaganda by creating the Mexican mural movement.

The final masterpiece was completed after six long years. Diego Rivera started painting the mural in 1929 and was completed in 1935, soon after the Mexican Revolution. The mural showcases Mexico’s history from early native Aztec world to the “future/present” Mexico. The different walls surrounding the staircase portray important historical events like the conquest, the colonial period, the Independence movement, the Revolution, the 1920s and 30s, and the “present” Mexico.

The right wall and the north wall start the chronological time line of the mural. The painting is based on the pre-conquest period of Mexico. The painting is set in a volcanic landscape where the indigenousness Aztec community is in social and cultural activities. The Feather Serpent (Quetzalcóatl) also appears on the top right corner surrounded by an audience of farmers and artisans. The west wall is not set in a particular order and the figures are less notable. The ideologies of Diego Rivera are presented in his work, as he was an active member of the Communist Party. The military, farmers and workers are display fighting for a better Mexico. In the center of the staircase, the painting on the wall represents different scenarios during the history of Mexico. The five main scenarios of Mexico’s Independence: The North American intervention of 1847, the second intervention by the French, the death of Maximiliano de Habsburgo, the liberal reform of 1857, the battle for Independence of 1810, and the Mexican Revolution of 1910. The mural explains the conflicts that Mexico encountered and represents the hope and dreams of the people. It is also notable that Rivera painted his future wife, Mexican painter Frida Kahlo, in the mural before they wedded.

For more (including 5 images) view the original article

The 20th November is a famous market in the city of Oaxaca. It is known for having foods such as, meats, produce, and bread. In the 20th November Market one can purchase their food and have it cooked right then and there. This is one of the most famous markets in Oaxaca. There are other famous markets like the Benito Juarez Market, an outside market, just one block away from the 20th November Market, but it does not compare to the 20th of November. This market began its construction in 1862 during the presidency of Benito Juarez. This is also the same year the Battle of Puebla took place. The market finalized construction in 1882. The name of the market comes from the start date of the Mexican Revolution in 1910. Though the market was constructed before the Mexican Revolution, it is not clear what the name was before it became the 20th of November. Regardless, it is safe to say that the name was given in honor Revolution Day in Mexico.

When one walks into the 20th of November Market, the first thing one would notice are the different types of smells and food that come from the market. Since everything is cooked inside the market, it is hard to avoid the aroma and the atmosphere. The market has some shops selling chocolate or bread, but many are small restaurants with counters and shared tables where you can stop for a quick bite. If one is a tourist, the owners of the small restaurants or shops would be quick to figure it out and they would badger one to eat at their restaurant or buy their goods. It is hard to find many tourists in this market though. Most of the people who visit the 20th of November are the locals of Oaxaca. Therefore, going to this market is ideal when trying to get a feel for a traditional Mexican vibe.

The 20th November Market has made itself part of the Oaxaca culture and tradition. Though there are many other markets in the republic of Mexico, there are only a few that are similar to this one, but many of the locals from Oaxaca prefer the 20th of November. The atmosphere in the market is absolutely phenomenal. No other market in Mexico would have the convenience that this market has. The 20th of November is just one block away from the “Zocalo” of Oaxaca. Hence, anyone that is walking the “Zocalo” in Oaxaca, and is hungry for Mexican food can easily stop by the 20th November Market. This market is well known in the city of Oaxaca and for that sole reason the market is iconic to the city and its people.

For more (including 5 images) view the original article

Walking up to the Templo de la Ciudad de México, one would believe that they were about to enter a Maya temple from the pre-Columbian Era. It must be shocking then when they realize that this Maya-style building is actually a religious temple for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS). This entry will discuss what Mayan Revival architecture is, how it became a common form of architecture in America, and how it became associated with, and used by, the LDS in the twenty-first century in order for the history of Mayan Revival architecture to be followed chronologically.

Mayan Revival architecture became popular in the early twentieth century and remained popular through the 1930s. The style featured opaque color schemes, sweeping geometric patterns, horizontal lines, flat roofs, stucco, and a close connection to the landscape. Inspiration for this style came from the ruins of Maya cities of Uxmal and Labná and illustrations of the Post-Classic era sites of the Yucatán as chronicled and illustrated in John Lloyd Stephens and Fredrick Catherwood’s book Incidents of Travel in the Yucatán. These sites were chosen because of their importance stated by Mexico’s Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia; which was a group of archaeologists in charge of clearing, restoring, and excavating important ruins in order to preserve them. Arguably, the history of Mayan Revival architecture starts with Stephens and Catherwood’s publications.

Stephens was an American travel writer and Catherwood was a British artist and architect. Both men were deeply interested in the conservation of the ruins and this inspired them to visit and document them while on a trip for president Martin Van Buren of the United States in 1839. They believed that if something was not done soon the ruins would be forgotten forever as they were already reclaimed by the jungle. Although they were not the first travelers to visit and document the ruins, Catherwood was the first to sketch the ruins instead of relying on only photographs. These sketches made it easier for scholars to observe the ruins and also helped dispel the common myth at the time that the ruins were created by indigenous peoples from East Asia or from the Old World.

Besides being an international best-seller, Incidents of Travel in the Yucatán inspired American archeologist Edward H. Thompson to visit Uxmal as well. In 1885 he was sent to Mérida, Mexico as U.S. consul for the Yucatán and Campeche. He conducted his research on Uxmal and Labná while there, and later on became fluent in the Yucatec Maya language due to the extensive amount of time spent studying the ruins. He took his findings and turned them into nine hundred and twenty-nine square meters of plaster models for the Columbian Exposition of 1893 in Chicago, where he was later employed by the Field Museum to further study the Maya ruins. This exposition was an intellectual world’s fair with exhibits from all over the world. The fair was also a celebration of the four-hundredth anniversary of Columbus’ landing in the New World, with exhibits featuring artifacts from the past as well as modern advancements. Thompson’s recreated models of the city of Uxmal and the arch of Labná were put on display here for all to see. Thus, the magnificence of Mexico’s ruins was brought to the United States.

The emergence of Mayan Revival architecture in the United States took over architectural and interior design in the early twentieth century due to changing attitudes about tracing genealogy from Native Americans and not from Europe. Frank Lloyd Wright was one of the architects who adopted this form of architecture. He took his inspiration from the architecture of the Maya temple at Uxmal that he saw at Chicago in 1893. Wright’s employer, Louis Sullivan, was in charge of designing a golden archway for the Transportation Building at the fair, so Wright was familiar with the Uxmal and Labná plaster exhibits. It was here that he found his new muse in architecture. He appreciated the openness and earth-like design of the buildings because it felt natural and allowed a way for nature to interact with the architecture. The classic style of architecture and the modern style were boring to him, so he was pleased to find new inspiration. The house he built almost thirty years later, known as the Hollyhock House, was designed in true Maya fashion with an open courtyard and a terraced and slanted roof. It also encompassed the horizontal lines and “textile blocks,” that Mayan ruins were recognized for.

Architects were not the only intellectuals interested in the Mayan Revival architecture. Scholars in the United States also decided to focus on the peoples of the New World. This led them to study indigenous peoples like the Native Americans of the United States and the Maya of Central America in order to identify the aspects of indigenous culture that had previously not been studied due to the dominance of European studies. American scholar and poet William Carlos Williams argued the importance of Maya architecture in modern design in his writings and his argument for reverting back to indigenous roots was featured in Broom magazine in 1922. Other scholars believed it was insensible to look back on a dead past for inspiration in the modern world, but Williams argued otherwise. He believed that looking to the Maya past was great inspiration for the present society because the Maya were able to create great things without the mindset of modernity and discussed this argument further in his writings on American history and society. In his work In the American Grain he states “The land! don’t you feel it? Doesn’t it make you want to go out and lift dead Indians tenderly from their graves to steal from them — as if it must be clinging even to their corpses — some authenticity?” Williams argues in this way that the architecture of the Maya was more “American” than the common European architecture and should be looked to for inspiration in American studies of heritage.

The LDS also took interest in Mayan Revival architecture because of its American indigenous appeal. How did the LDS become associated with Mayan Revival architecture and how did this architecture end up in Mexico City? The Hollyhock House is an important component in this story; because it inspired the LDS to adopt the Mayan Revival style. In the 1930s, just as interest in Mayan Revival architecture was beginning to fade, the LDS administration in the United States decided to adopt the style for their religious buildings and temples; specifically based off of Wright’s Hollyhock House. The idea behind the use of this specific type of architecture by the LDS actually had to do with the nature of their religion due to their interest in indigenous peoples. They look to the past of Native Americans who they believe migrated to the Americas from Israel after 600 BCE and believe that the Maya are related to the indigenous of North America and are therefore also Lamanites or derived from one of the four civilizations that make up their religious past. Originally, ideas for an LDS meetinghouse in Mexico City were planned in 1934 but were never accomplished due to the onslaught of World War II. Eventually, Emil B. Fetzer constructed the LDS temple in 1976 in the Mayan architecture style that Wright used, as originally planned in the 1930s. The fact that Mayan Revival architecture was still used exemplifies the Mayan Revival legacy started by the plaster recreations of Uxmal and Labná.

Upon entering the Templo de la Ciudad de México, the visitor witnesses the beauty and timelessness of Maya architecture that captivated Catherwood when he created his illustrations of Uxmal and Labná. They share in the greatness demanded to be displayed in the form of plaster models created by Thompson at the Columbian Exposition of 1893. They understand how its’ viewers were subsequently captivated, such as Frank Lloyd Wright, and how he was enthralled by the natural beauty of the architecture. They encounter the past that William Carlos Williams found and decided that modern day America needed to look back to it. Just as the beauty of Mayan Revival architecture could not be left in the jungles of the Yucatán, so it also had to be brought back home. The LDS temple was able to achieve this feat eighty-three years after its original display at the Columbian Exposition, and Maya architecture can now be honored as it should have been all those years ago while waiting in the jungle.

For more (including 11 images) view the original article

During the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, the Maya people in the northern Yucatán Peninsula, especially around the region of Izamal, experienced a process of conversion to Christian Catholicism led by a limited number of Spanish friars and priests. This study aims to demonstrate that the Yucatec Maya embraced elements of Catholicism due to connections with their own traditional worldviews and established spiritual mentalities. Rather than focusing on the violent aspects of Spanish colonization, this study highlights the largely peaceful and natural facets of syncretism, a merging of traditional Yucatec Maya and Catholic practices.

The syncretic process, which involved the merging of indigenous religious practices and Catholicism, appears within four key aspects: saint veneration, festivals and holidays, rituals, and pilgrimages. Among these elements, saint veneration provided the foundation for structuring and linking these practices. By examining primary sources, available case studies, field work, and material evidence, this essay seeks to provide a comprehensive explanation of these syncretic practices, their origins, and their significance. Friar Diego de Landa's Relación will be the starting point for analysis and interpretation of indigenous Maya practices prior to the Conquest. [1] This will be followed by a comparison of documented Maya Catholic practices surrounding the cult of the most important aspect of Mary in the Yucatán, in her aspect as the Virgin of Izamal. This will demonstrate influences and links to previous Maya traditions, and when applicable, compared with modern syncretic Maya practice. [2]

Ultimately, this study will contribute to a deeper understanding of the peaceful blending of Yucatec Maya and Catholic practices during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The ways in which the Yucatec Maya adapted and integrated elements of Catholicism into their existing spiritual beliefs, demonstrate the resilience and adaptability of their culture, in the face of significant external challenges.

In examining the four key areas of Yucatec Maya syncretism, saint veneration stands out as the most significant, playing a central role in the other syncretic practices of festivals, ceremonies, and pilgrimages. [3] Furthermore, the Maya linked these practices closely to the cult of the Virgin of Izamal, demonstrating her civic primacy. [4] The Catholic practices endorsed by Spanish missionaries offered a means for the continuation of multiple types of pre-Conquest worship. According to Diego de Landa, “so many idols did they have, that their gods did not suffice them, there being no animal or reptile of which they did not make images, and these in the form of their gods or goddesses.”[5] He notes that while there existed many images of stone, they greatly valued images of wood, and respectively noted that they “honored them because of what they represented,” despite being crafted by human hands and not divine in origin. [6]

But what did these “idols” and images represent for the Yucatec Maya? As De Landa notes, their images could be gods, but there is evidence to suggest that they could also represent a number of entities within the Maya spiritual and geographic landscape. Besides a number of common cultural deities in the Yucatán Peninsula, Classic and Postclassic Maya identified strongly with their local civic identity, often also tied to one or more major patron deities. For instance, Itzamna was revered at Izamal, Kukulcan in Mayapan and Chichen Itza, and Ah Muzen Cab in Tulum. [7]

Maya engraved images could have also represented more than their gods, but also the spirits of the land and family ancestors. The spirits of the land, or the "lords" of the mountains and waters, are not entirely understood in their differences with other spiritual beings, except that they dwelled in the natural landscape and geography outside of the cities. [8] In contrast, Maya cities were home to the aforementioned major gods. Thanks again to De Landa, we have a better understanding of how Yucatec Maya used carved images to honor and venerate their deceased family members and ancestors, at least among the wealthier classes. De Landa writes that they “made statues of wood, made hollow…then they burned part of the body, and put part of the ashes therein…[and] kept them together with all the other images…among other idols, with great reverence and affection.”[9] He even says that the Maya would preserve some of the skin and teeth of the dead person on the statue, and present them offerings of food and drink, as if they were still living among them. [10]

This specific and widespread Maya practice, combined with other applications of engraved images symbolizing powerful spiritual forces, readily allowed for syncretism with Catholic saint veneration, particularly in the case of the Virgin Mary cult at Izamal. As the most important saint of the Northern Yucatán, she took on numerous functions, primarily as a healer and protector during natural disasters. Furthermore, she represented a shift away from the traditional civic deities and towards a new, Catholic, and Hispanicized civic and regional identity. [11]

The origins and beginnings of saint cults among the Maya, where evidence is available, do indicate a syncretic connection with previous indigenous civic deities, land spirits, and famous ancestors, although there exists a great deal of variation. For the sake of comparison, the origins of saint veneration among the K'iche' Maya in Guatemala serve as an important case, where they preserved translation stories (that is the translation or transference of divine power and relics from one region to another), unlike many Yucatec saints. For example, the cult of Santiago among the K'iche' maintained a tradition of rejection and acceptance of saintly images. The statues and engraved images of the saint are carried outside the towns and cities, and placed in wells and cenotes, symbolically beaten, and then brought back, combining the elements of festival, ritual, and pilgrimage in this one event. This represents both the status of Catholic saints as foreign visitors, but also connects them with previous beliefs of land spirits living in the wilderness, now accepted in the civic spaces. [12]

Unfortunately in the case of the Virgin of Izamal, available archival records are silent on the hagiographic origins of the saint, and De Landa himself, bishop of Izamal during the mid sixteenth century at the time of her translation, does not even mention her presence. [13] Instead, we must rely on a general narrative source from the following century (1633), the Historia de Yucatán: Devocionario de Nuestra Señora de Izamal y Conquista Spiritual, written by Fray Bernardo de Lizana. [14] Lizana’s work is primarily concerned with recorded miracles of the Virgin, and does not record the actual circumstances of the Virgin of Izamal’s translation or origins. Lizana did record the earliest instance of a commission for an Italian artist to create the earliest image of the Virgin Mary by De Landa himself. This commission seemed to have been originally intended only for De Landa’s Convento de San Antonio de Padua, built upon the old temple of Itzamna. [15]

The significance and spiritual statement of this commision, and the presence of the new saint, literally and symbolically on top of a previous Maya center of spiritual power cannot be overestimated. Besides the singular site of Izamal, Fransiscan missionaries regularly exploited and used architecture as a means of co-opting indigenous spatial understandings of authority. [16] While this strategy had mixed success elsewhere, it proved triumphant because of the previous Yucatec Maya associations and practices of communal veneration centered around the site of Izamal.

The city of Izamal received its name from the previous Maya deity, Itzamna, a god of creation and healing. Before the conquest, this city had been a site of pilgrimage for those seeking remedies. [17] During the Yellow Fever outbreak of 1648 in the Yucatán Peninsula, the indigenous nobility of Izamal organized a formal procession of the physical image and statue of the Virgin from Izamal. This procession included stops along all of the major villages between Izamal, and the Spanish capital of Merida, for locals to offer prayers and offerings to the saint, hoping to relieve the disease. [18] This may appear to have been a wholly Catholic instance of saint veneration, since similar processions are practiced in Europe. However, there is evidence for a Maya precedent and foundation. More importantly, this event clearly illustrates the different interpretations of the same Catholic religious activity by both Spanish and indigenous Maya audiences. [19]

For more (including 5 images) view the original article

HemisFair, held in San Antonio, Texas in 1968, was the first and only world’s fair to be held in the American Southwest. Jerome K. Harris (a local San Antonio business owner) originally proposed the idea of a “HemisFair” that would focus on Latin America. The idea was endorsed by Congressman Henry B. González, also a San Antonio native, who is most frequently credited with the proposal for the fair. [1] The theme of the fair became “The Confluence of Civilization in the Americas”, as part of the Pan-American trend that had dominated world’s fairs since 1901 with the Pan-American Exposition in Buffalo, New York. The world's fairs have been an avenue to display and share culture since Great Britain’s Crystal Palace exhibit in 1851, however, early fairs often displayed indigenous peoples or other nationalities as oddities and exotics as a way to establish superiority and cultural dominance of the Europeans and Americans who were hosting the fairs. The Pan-American-themed fairs had sought to move away from this discriminatory display and celebrate the many cultures that made up the Americas, most however were unsuccessful in portraying these cultures accurately. The potential for San Antonio to adequately represent and include the Latin Americans in their fair was incredibly high considering Texas’s heritage with Mexico and with San Antonio having the largest Mexican American population in the United States. [2] With this previous trend of inadequately representing other cultures in the world’s fairs, was the 1968 HemisFair successful in displaying the “Confluence of Civilization in the Americas” in regard to the Latin American communities? Yes. HemisFair was successful in accurately representing Latin Americans, fair organizers went to great lengths to extend diplomacy and involve Latin American countries in a world fair for the first time. Yet, despite the upward mobility middle-class Mexican Americans of San Antonio experienced from the fair, lower-class Mexican Americans found little to no benefits from HemisFair. Lower-class Mexican Americans specifically faced exclusion and discrimination throughout the organizing, building, and execution of the fair. [3]

The design of HemisFair was more inclusive than previous Pan-American fairs and organizers put substantial thought into representing the confluence, or merging, of civilizations that created the Americas. This effort is best exemplified in the logo created for the fair, a swirling circle set to the left side of an outer circle. It is symbolic of the creation of the world and men traveling West where they merge and create the “Confluence of Civilizations in the Americas”, the theme for the fair. Additionally, HemisFair had four sub-themes: The Legacy, The Harvest, The Promise, and The Folklore. “The Legacy” became the main theme, which centered around becoming citizens of the Western Hemisphere through immigration. HemisFair organizers felt that this was a common ground between people of the Americas “all of whom sprang from the same common heritage-immigration.” [4] This symbolism and focus on immigration was exclusionary to the indigenous people of the Americas but was unique in the sense that it did not assign Otherness to any ethnicity. Whereas previous fairs intended to exhibit their superiority and excellence to the people attending, HemisFair intended to celebrate the cultures, specifically Latin cultures, that established the Americas.

In addition to the inclusion of Latin Americans in the design of the fair, many middle-class Mexican Americans took on leadership positions within HemisFair’s organization committee, San Antonio Fair, Inc. (SAF). Henry B. González, the first Mexican American from Texas to be elected to the U.S. House of Representatives, became the face of HemisFair. [5] He proposed the idea for HemisFair and oversaw its approval by Congress. González was able to use his place on the SAF committee to incorporate more Mexican Americans into leadership positions. Two of those men, Ed Castillo and Carlos Freymann acted as public relations, interpreters, and liaisons between the US and Latin American countries to promote HemisFair. Castillo and Freymann were given the position of ambassadors to Latin American countries, their ability to speak Spanish “reaffirmed the notion of Pan-American unity and helped mediate cross-cultural interactions.” [6] Henry A. Guerra, Jr., a San Antonio radio and television personality, introduced designs for a Plaza de Libertad (Liberty Plaza) that would showcase significant figures that contributed to America’s liberation. Although his designs did not make it into the final designs for the fair, Guerra contributed significantly by serving as “international department liaison” where he facilitated participation with Latinos during the fair preparations. [7] The contribution of these men was instrumental in the success of HemisFair’s goal of confluence between the United States and Latin American countries.

Not only was HemisFair unique in its goal of equal representation of Latin America, but many Latin countries collaborated in the organization and design of the fair. The Latin American Committee was formed to ensure San Antonio’s Latino community was involved and consulted. Further, the Pan-American Public Relations Association “included two representatives from each of the twelve major ‘Latin’ civic organizations”, who were consulted on ways to accurately incorporate Mexican culture and heritage into the fair. Henry Guerra also suggested collaboration with the Mexican Consulate which later led to the creation of a Mexican American Friendship Committee. Several Mexican architects and artists as well as the Brazilian landscapist, Roberto Burle Marx, were consulted and included in the designs for HemisFair. [8] Mexican artist and architect Juan O’Gorman was commissioned to create a piece for the fair. He created “Confluence of Civilizations in the Americas” and it welcomed guests at the entrance. [9] The Foreign Participation Area was created to provide exhibition space for other countries and “numerous” Latin American countries participated. [10] Mexico acted as a major contributor and sponsor of HemisFair. They boasted one of the largest exhibits. A pamphlet from the Mexican Pavillion boats of the rich history of Mexico as well as technological advancements the country had achieved in modernity, something Latin American countries had been denied in previous fairs that only incorporated their wild and indigenous past. [11] Coincidently, Mexico hosted the Olympics later that year, which both countries used to their advantage. Mexican and American officials wanted to encourage travel between the two events. The Pan-American Highway was advertised to promote this transportation. U.S. immigration officials were instructed to practice “goodwill” towards Mexican and Latin Americans traveling to HemisFair. However, this was not always observed when it came to working-class Mexicans because of the increased illegal migration that resulted from the Bracero Program that lasted from 1942-1964. [12]

With the intentional inclusion of Latin Americans, such as The American GI Forum and League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), in the design and organization of the fair by the SAF, many Latin and specifically Mexican American organizations saw the fair as an opportunity to “achieve full integration and… first-class citizenship.” [13] Texas officials hoped that the theme and the fair itself would “ease racial tensions between civil rights groups”, this garnered the help of Mexican American and African Americans activists with the expectation of increased jobs and economic opportunities for their communities. [14] Mexican American organizations and officials sought the use of pluralism, or incorporation with other Latin American communities, to increase their social and political identities. They began identifying themselves as “Latin American” rather than “Mexican American”, as in LULAC. [15] Although LULAC and the NAACP originally supported the fair, they realized that it did not provide the job opportunities and equality that were promised. Further, younger Latin organizations, such as Chicano activists and the Mexican American Youth Organization (MAYO), protested the fair from the beginning because of the racial inequality it highlighted, believing that “mega-event” like HemisFair only furthered class divisions. [16]

Although HemisFair provided leadership opportunities for middle-class Mexican Americans and Latin American countries, lower-class Mexican Americans experienced discrimination and exclusion by the SAF. The construction of the fairgrounds for HemisFair created ethnic tensions as it “emerged out of a process of ethnic erasure and urban cleansing.” [17] The city was still heavily segregated, as housing segregation had not ended in Texas until the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. [18] The site chosen for the fairgrounds destroyed a 92-acre multiethnic community and displaced over 2,300 residents. [19] In addition to losing their homes, lower-class Mexican Americans were largely excluded from participation in the fair because of the cost of the fair. A study done by Richard Harris demonstrates that despite the progress displayed towards the larger Latin American community in regards to HemisFair, the following generations of Mexican Americans experienced little upward mobility in socioeconomic status. Harris analyzed statistics for jobs held by different ethnicities in San Antonio and compared their annual incomes from different years throughout the 1960s, 70s, and 80s. In the conclusion of his study, he stated, “At present, it must be concluded that San Antonio Mexican Americans have not attained equal chances for occupational success even in the city's relatively favorable environment… Judging from the evidence of this analysis, no progress has been made toward the greater occupational integration.” [21] As a result, we must conclude that lower-class Mexican Americans remained lower-class and therefore received little to no benefit for the inclusivity of Latin Americans during HemisFair.

Despite the unfortunate exclusion of lower-class Mexican Americans in HemisFair ‘68, the fair was largely successful in achieving a “Confluence of Civilizations in the Americas.” Several Latin Americans not only participated in the fair but held leadership positions. They were accurately represented by the people of San Antonio and the multiple Latin Americans that were commissioned to assist in the design of the fair. Regarding the exclusion of lower-class Mexican Americans, it is difficult to argue that the exclusion resulted from racial discrimination since the SAF went to such great lengths to justly consult many facets of the Latin American community. Further research into this argument might include data about the participation of lower-class citizens of other ethnicities to determine whether the experiences of lower-class Mexican Americans was the result of racial discrimination or simply class discrimination.

For more (including 7 images) view the original article

Archaeologist, Alberto Ruz Lhuillier, was born in France on January 27, 1906. He moved to Mexico, becoming a nationalized Mexican on September 3, 1940. Ruz took much pride in his Mexican identity and acquired an admiration for Mexico’s history. In 1938, he began studying anthropology at the Escuela Nacional de Antropologia e Historia (ENAH) in Mexico City. Ruz graduated from ENAH in 1945, becoming one of the first people in Mexico to acquire the professional title of “archaeologist.” In February of 1949, Ruz was assigned head of the excavation team at the Palenque ruins by the director of the Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia (INAH), which is where he landed his great discovery.

With a height of 65 feet, the Temple of Inscriptions is the tallest structure found at the Palenque ruins. It possesses a wide frontal stairway that leads up to the temple where the three panels, covered in 620 carved hieroglyphs, are located. It was revealed by scholars that the hieroglyphs are dates of important events that occurred in Palenque, such as enemy attacks on the city and the rise of a new ruler to the throne, with the latest of the hieroglyphs dating back to 692 A.D. What intrigued Ruz about the Temple of Inscriptions was its flagstone flooring, as no other structure’s floor in Palenque was made of this type of material. He became particularly interested in the double row of holes that one of the stone slabs possessed. Ruz’s close observations of the temple allowed him to notice a valuable detail, it appeared the temple’s walls did not end at the floor.

Upon lifting the stone slab with the double row of holes, Ruz discovered an underground stairway that led into the center of the structure, but the entry had been purposefully blocked with large stones. From 1949 to 1951, Ruz and his team spent three seasons working countless hours that consisted of digging and removing stones from the hidden stairway.

In their fourth excavation season of 1952, they finished uncovering the stairway’s seventy-one stair steps, which led directly to a barred stone doorway. After digging through the doorway, Ruz and his team discovered a second blockaded door and in front of it was placed a box containing seven jade beads and earplugs with three red painted shells. Behind the second doorway, they found yet another box, which held the remains of six human skeletons. To their astonishment, Ruz and his team came across a third doorway that entered into a 29 ft. long by 13 ft. wide room, in which their great discovery was accomplished. The walls of the mysterious room were adorned in stucco figures that appeared to be nine men dressed in ancient attire. It is unclear whether these men were the Nine Lords of the Night from Maya theology or ancestors of the deceased. In the room, there was also a large rectangular stone slab, decorated in carved hieroglyphs, that was thought by Ruz to be an altar for Maya priests.

In mid November of 1952, Ruz solved the mystery of the hidden staircase in Palenque's Temple of Inscriptions after he ordered to have the large stone slab lifted and beneath it was found the tomb of the great Palenque ruler, K’inich Janahb Pakal. Pakal had ascended the throne when he was twelve years old and ruled the city of Palenque until his death in 683 A.D., at the age of eighty. Inside his sarcophagus, Pakal was found adorned with several pieces of jade jewelry, including a burial mask made of numerous jade fragments, shells and stones. Ruz’s discovery of Pakal’s tomb in the Temple of Inscriptions allowed for advancement in the understanding of ancient Maya culture and inspired Mexican archaeologists to further explore the intricate Maya architecture.

For more (including 4 images) view the original article

Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) is an edible flowering weed that can be cultivated as a leaf vegetable and as a pseudocereal. Unlike true cereals, which are identified by botanists as a flowering grass, pseudocereals are typically a grain which can be ground up into wheat and utilized in the same ways as true cereals. In Tenochtitlan (modern-day Mexico City), amaranth was part of the quintessential diet and held symbolic and political power in addition to its nutritional use. In recent times, amaranth had been widely disregarded as a viable food option until the 1970s, when nutritionists found that the seeds could be cultivated as a pseudocereal which was high in protein, fiber, and could be used as a gluten-free substitute in confections and flour.

Archaeologists have identified amaranth as the oldest cultivated crop in the Americas, with evidence of its cultivation dating back to around 4000 BCE in Tehuacán archaeological digs. Bernardino de Sahagun’s Florentine Codex offers one of the first European ethnographies of the Americas, and illustrates amaranth being harvested and threshed for its grains in Aztec society. In urban centers like Tenochtitlan, amaranth was abundantly harvested in garden patches called milpas that were constructed from woven baskets and placed in a freshwater lake The seeds of the harvested amaranth plant would then be sent in clay pottery for tribute payment to the religious and governmental centers of the city, along with tributes such as corn, cacao, and quetzal bird feathers.

Amaranth also served an important role in religious offerings and foods for spiritual celebrations. Amaranth was known as huauhtli in the Nahuatl-speaking areas of Mesoamerica, and would be crafted into confections called zoale or popped like popcorn over a fire and stuck together with bees honey or agave nectar. When made into a confection, the zoale would be made to resemble Chicomecóatl, the Aztec maize goddess of sustenance and fertility. During feast days, sacrificial bloodletting was an important step in creating this sacred food, primarily because blood would occasionally be used as an ingredient. Amaranth greens would also be harvested for use in tamales. Sahagun’s Florentine Codex illustrates a feast day where tamales of maize are wrapped in the greens of the amaranth plant.

Amaranth’s resurgence as a food was due not only to its nutritional value, but also to its accessibility. Experts on food availability and nutrition argue that amaranth can be used to help fight world hunger and combat malnutrition. It is currently harvested for its greens in areas of Africa and Asia, and the cereals have been cultivated more actively by farmers in areas of Mexico such as Oaxaca. The weed is also semi-drought resistant, and offers many of the daily needed vitamins and minerals. Amaranth's wide variety of uses throughout time and in different parts of the world makes a case for its usefulness as a modern superfood. Although used in a religious context by the Aztecs, it is now a globally growing commodity that has great nutritional value. Its use, either as a cereal grain or as a vegetable, can be utilized by areas wrought with food shortage as a sustainable crop that can also combat malnutrition. Its use has seen a revival, and its history as a crop has one of the longest-lasting legacies on earth.

For more (including 5 images) view the original article

The arid desert terrain vibrates as an incoming stampede approaches a Mexican town. Upon the horses, ride the mighty Comanche people. They gallop to pillage the resources of the Mexican settlers, who inhabit the land that once belonged to the Comanche. Though many historians detail these raids, few scholars attempt to construct a holistic understanding of the nineteenth-century U.S.-Mexican borderland disputes with the indigenous. The United States and Mexico presented legislation, such as the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, to bring peace among both countries and to maintain control over the Amerindian population. This study examines the impact of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and the Mexican-American War on the indigenous people. One crucial article in the treaty, Article XI, allied the two governments against the growing threat of indigenous encounters in the newly established U.S-Mexico borderlands. Additionally, this study further explores the indigenous struggles against the rising U.S. and Mexican powers in the nineteenth-century. Thus, the legislation and rhetoric of Article XI exhibited the dehumanization of the Amerindians and their culture.

The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo remains an essential aspect of U.S.-Mexican diplomacy. Signed on February 2, 1848, the treaty ended the Mexican-American War and forged new boundaries between both countries. According to Richard Griswold de Castillo’s The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo: A Legacy of Conflict, the treaty consisted of twenty-three articles. Article XI explained the U.S.-Mexican management concerning hostile indigenous raids. The treaty bestowed the responsibilities of indigenous supervision to the U.S. government. The agreement enforced the U.S. to protect the citizens of both countries from these attacks. Additionally, Article XI prohibited the U.S. from purchasing any captive or stolen property of Mexico from the Amerindians. The U.S. government ensured to rescue and return the captives to Mexico. Ultimately, Article XI formed an alliance between the U.S. and Mexico, which required the United States to police the entire borderlands region of any indigenous raids. [1]

Before the Mexican-American War, Mexican settlers of the northern states suffered a long period of indigenous raids. In the 1830s, many southern plains Amerindians raided Mexican towns, ranches, and haciendas. The Amerindians who participated in the raids included the Comanche and Kiowa. [2] Brian DeLay, professor of history at the University of California Berkeley, emphasizes the importance of Article XI. He discusses its strong demand among the citizens of Northern Mexico. In his monograph, War of A Thousand Deserts: Indian Raids and the U.S. – Mexican War, DeLay provides data regarding Amerindian and Mexican violence along the northern states. He collected the data from various archival sources dating from 1831 to 1848. DeLay presents graphs that account the number of Mexican and Comanche/Kiowas deaths. The Amerindian communities killed approximately 2649 Mexican settlers, whereas the settlers killed an estimated 702 Comanches and Kiowas. [3]

The number of violent accounts within this region encouraged the passing of Article XI in the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. According to DeLay’s article, “Independent Indians and the U.S.-Mexican War,” most northern Mexicans believed that their government failed to protect them from Amerindian raids. During this period, the Mexican government’s resources and security lacked in the northern states due to the conflicts between the centralists and federalists of Mexico. This forced northern Mexicans to turn to foreign powers. Under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, the U.S. managed all indigenous raids for the northern states of Mexico. Northern Mexicans viewed the U.S. government as their saviors from the native raids. [4] According to a treaty ambassador named Nicholas Trist, the northern states of Mexico agreed to the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo solely for Article XI. [5]

DeLay and others illuminate the Mexican perspective on the raids of the Comanche people during the Mexican-American War. As the dominant indigenous raiders within the borderlands, the Comanche continued to attack the weakened and distracted Mexico throughout the Mexican-American War. [6] According to Pekka Hämäläinen, author of The Comanche Empire, the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo forced the Comanche’s home territory to fall in the center of U.S. control. He examines how the powerful Comanche viewed themselves as vigorous combatants and diplomats during the Mexican–American War. [7] In 1846, Pia Kusa, a Comanche leader, attempted to negotiate with the U.S. to form an alliance against Mexico in return for arms and ammunition. U.S. General John Wool rejected his request. Wool then threatened, the Comanche with punishment if they attempted to raid any Mexican town without motive. [8] Cases such as these strengthened the settlers’ calls for action, and proved the importance of Article XI for both countries. Later, Hämäläinen discusses how the United States’ obligations to protect Mexico from Amerindian raids proved to be impossible. The extensive resources became too costly. Instead, Indian agents, such as James Calhoun, dispatched emissaries to the Comanche territory, known as Comanchería, to purchase any Mexican captives and return them to their country. [9] Calhoun’s approach followed the agreement as stated in Article XI.

For the local indigenous peoples, the new legislation between the U.S. and Mexican powers proved to be problematic. The conflicts in the borderlands occurred during the height of the United States’ oppression of the Amerindians. The U.S. government prioritized the removal and elimination of natives. For instance, the U.S. military attempted to annihilate the American bison. As an important resource and cultural symbol to many plains Amerindians, the bison’s extinction meant the extinction of the Comanche and other indigenous groups. [10] Thankfully, the U.S. military’s efforts failed. The white settlers of the United States considered other methods of indigenous removal. They believed that the Amerindian presence posed an obstacle for Manifest Destiny. In Rhetoric and Reality on the U.S.-Mexico Border: Place, Politics, Home, K. Jill Fleuriet, professor of anthropology at the University of Texas at San Antonio, focuses her research on the Rio Grande Valley of Texas and reconstructs the contemporary idea of the border. When contextualizing this important monograph, Fleuriet states that Manifest Destiny and colonialism share an “expansion for land, belief that indigenous communities were inferior and dangerous, and a religious and moral justification to conquer and assimilate.” [11] Article XI strictly highlighted the indigenous people of the borderlands as “savage” and dangerous. [12] Nineteenth century discourse concerning Amerindians shifted cultural and social processes. The policies between U.S. and Mexico exhibited this type of vocabulary.

Scholars have inspected the distasteful discourse within the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo’s Article XI. The phrasing within the treaty portrayed the natives as villains, and not as a society who lost their home to the practices of Manifest Destiny. The rhetoric referred to the Amerindian communities as “savage tribes,” which displayed a damaging bias within the foundation of this document. [13] Viewing the natives as “dangerous” assisted in the U.S. government’s endeavor to occupy native lands. The rhetoric of Article XI influenced other Amerindian communities. Blake Gentry and his team examine the topic of elimination in their article “Indigenous Survival and Settler Colonial Dispossession on the Mexican Frontier.” They follow the Tohono O’odham, a sedentary Sonoran indigenous group, and their toils for land rights. The authors, a team comprising of various interdisciplinary fields, explain that elimination involved occupying a targeted group’s land, rather than directly destroying a group’s race or identity. Because a community’s land presented an aspect of their character, land stripping helped the U.S. and Mexican powers dehumanize the Tohono O’odham, the Comanche, and all the indigenous groups. [14]

Gentry states that Article XI specifically targeted horse-riding indigenous communities, which included the Comanche. In addition to the Mexican citizens, equestrian communities often raided the Tohono O’odham. Alas, the treaty failed to offer U.S. protection for sedentary indigenous communities. Additionally, Brendan Lindsay, author of Murder State: California’s Native American Genocide, 1846-1873, reveals another factor regarding the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo’s neglect towards Amerindians. The U.S. provided Mexican citizens, who lived in the newly acquired territory, the choice to remain a citizen of Mexico or to become a U.S. citizen. The treaty failed to address any citizenship concerns to the indigenous peoples of California. [15] Though the treaty directly targets equestrian native groups, it also inflicted a strong impact on sedentary groups.

While the settlers of Mexico benefitted from the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo’s Article XI, the Amerindians struggled under the dehumanizing laws established to steal their land. The historical narratives prove that the nineteenth-century borderlands were a harsh environment under constant unrest for all participants. This research shows that legislation with an ethnocentric bias forms a foundation of destructive policies within a territory. Future laws then stem from these discriminatory institutions affecting contemporary communities. This analysis shows the violent side of several societies, and how it remains essential to explore perspectives from many historical players. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo forged an essential aspect of the U.S.-Mexico borderlands. Its impact will continue to welcome new historical questions from future scholars of U.S.-Mexico relations and indigenous studies.

For more (including 6 images) view the original article

On October 18, 1916, fashion designers flocked to the Museum of Natural History in New York City and declared that the “art of the Red Man…[is] a field of remarkable possibilities for all those American designers, artists, and textile men who avail themselves to it.” [1] Fifty years later, in 1966, David Loring of Jeanette Maternities boasted of their “most popular…huipil from Oaxaca” described as a “glorified poncho with crewel-type embroidery” [2] (see Figure 1). The huipil is a wide, sleeveless tunic and has been the prevalent upper-body garment of the indigenous women of Mexico for thousands of years. In 1981, award winning designer Clovis Ruffin’s Aztec lingerie and loungewear was featured as “one of fall’s most stylish ways to stay home" [3] (see Figure 2). Even into the 1990s, Los Angeles fashion designers offered “fresh interpretations of age old prints” in an “Aztec Treasures” feature [4] (see Figure 3). These are but a few examples of appropriation of indigenous, culture by American fashion designers. The likes of Urban Outfitters and French fashion designer Isabel Marant have continued the centuries-old tradition of carrying a “penchant for the ethnic,” [5] therefore contributing to the persistence of cultural appropriation in fashion.

The appropriation of indigenous art by larger manufacturing companies almost always has a negative impact on original artists, both economically and culturally. As is the case with any form of plagiarism, economic harm impacts heavily on the indigenous artists whose designs are abused as they cannot participate in the profit. Indigenous people are pushed to the brink of society and their art and culture misappropriated by large, profiteering fashion companies that are nearly impossible to challenge. Possibly one of the most infamous cases of this in recent years has been major fashion label Carolina Herrera’s use of indigenous Mexican designs in its “Resort 2020” collection (see Figure 4). Carolina Herrera is a Venezuelan fashion designer, notable for dressing various First Ladies, including Jacqueline Onassis, Laura Bush, and Michelle Obama. Mexico’s Minister of Culture, Alejandra Fausto, has argued that the designs used by Carolina Herrera are not only clearly plagiarized from indigenous designs, but actually have clear and “well documented” origins as well. [6] While Carolina Herrera considers the designs to be a “tribute” to Mexican culture, others, including the Mexican government, consider it to be a clear-cut case of cultural appropriation.

However, the Mexican government and elite have their own troubling and often overlooked history of appropriation. Since the Porifiriato (the era of the presidency of Mexico of Porfirio Díaz, 1876-1911), there have been efforts by Mexican elites to create a sense of Mexican nationalism and identity among an extremely diverse populace. Alongside the development of a ‘Mexican’ identity, Mexico has put massive efforts into the expansion of large Mexican industry to become more competitive within the global market. [7] This multifaceted approach to cultivating a sense of Mexican nationalism has led to cultural appropriation and plagiarism of indigenous culture by the government and elite. The culture and history of communities who have been discriminated against, marginalized, and pushed to the edges of Mexican society for hundreds of years was consequently taken advantage of as a part of an overarching “Mexican” culture. Mexican cultural identity, and the inclusion of indigenous cultures in this national identity, is exceedingly problematic considering that indigenous people in Mexico have “suffered four centuries of exclusion and extreme poverty…their ancient polities had been dismantled and fragmented” [8] by colonialism and Mexican elitism. By creating an “identity” out of Mexican multiculturalism, indigenous people have been further exploited for their long traditions and unique cultures.

Although the utilization of indigenous culture has been evident in many artistic industries, such as film, music, and more, the clothing industry became a market in which “the division between the traditional sector and the modern” was instantly clear. [9] Although some clothes were still “spun in remote villages,” the modern manufacturing and production of clothing was becoming increasingly commonplace in the 1940s. [10] Due to this, as more factories and mass manufacturers began to include indigenous motifs in their subsidized ‘Mexican’ designs, the Mexican government itself began to play a role in the economic dispossession of indigenous artists.

In recent years, the Mexican government has developed a large role in calling out major brands’ appropriation of indigenous Mesoamerican culture. In the case of Carolina Herrera, Alejandra Frausto wrote to the designer “to demand an explanation for her company’s use of indigenous Mexican designs in its latest collection.” [11] The government has also proposed a law to “’tackle the plagiarism that different indigenous peoples and communities have suffered’ by recognising them as the lawful owners of their cultural and identity elements.” [12] This will be of the utmost importance for the economic and cultural wellbeing of indigenous artisans. However, the question still remains whether this will hold Mexico’s manufacturing elite accountable to the same degree as foreign manufacturers.

For more (including 4 images) view the original article

Many explorers have travelled throughout Mexico searching for ruins of early Mesoamerican civilizations and historical sites. A fascination with our early origins has led to many explorations. The belief that ancient Israelites and Christ himself visited the early Americas was one of many persistent theories in early archaeology. Many refused to believe that the Maya of the present were the descendants of such advanced civilizations.

In the 20th century Thomas Stuart Ferguson, a Mormon lawyer, was one of the first to launch archaeological explorations to search for proof of the LDS Church’s beliefs in Mexico’s southern region of Campeche. He founded the New World Archaeological Foundation (NWAF) to help find some of the places described in the Book of Mormon. After many years of searching, Ferguson along with John Sorenson a master’s archaeology student from Brigham Young University (BYU), started searching for evidence from the Pre-Classic period. While flying over an underexplored region of Chiapas many mounds could be spotted below, leading to the discovery of a new site.

Chiapa de Corzo is a beautiful town in the highlands of Chiapas that features many Colonial period churches and monasteries. It has a rich history and culture. The fact that so many mounds lay buried for centuries is proof that there are many hidden treasures yet to be found in the state of Chiapas. The archaeological site discovered near the town bears its name and is the site of many surprises. In fact today it is near the Nestle factory.

Chiapa de Corzo is a Zoque site that borders the edges of the known Olmec and Maya civilizations. The foundation now supported by BYU’s Anthropology department has continued to further research and preserve artifacts from the ancient Mesoamerican world. The New World Archaeological Foundation (NWAF) in conjunction with the Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia (INAH) and the Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico (UNAM) have worked together to excavate and preserve this historical site.

At this archaeological site, 3 Zoque pyramids and many artifacts have been discovered over the years. The excavation in 2008 to verify and update data with new archaeological techniques has brought to light more signs of Olmec influence among these Maya and Zoque in Chiapas. Many of the artifacts and tombs found here are from the Pre-Classic or Formative period.

In 2010, while excavating Mound # 11 in hopes of discovering its place in time, the archaeologists unearthed a tomb. This 2700 year ago crypt from the Middle Formative period is one of the oldest Mesoamerican pyramid tombs ever to be discovered. The man in the tomb was around 50 at the time of his death and by the artifacts placed with him, of some high status. Within this tomb there was evidence to connect this region with the Olmec of La Venta. Further emphasizing the breadth of the trade routes utilized by early Mesoamerican societies. The excavations in Chiapa de Corzo have only enriched the story of Mesoamerican origins and expanded their place in time.[1]

For more (including 6 images) view the original article

“The Aztec Calendar Stone is one of the most famous objects in world archaeology, art history, and visual culture”. The Calendar Stone was built during the post classic era. It’s time of construction would have been the last years of the Aztec kingdom under the rule of Motecuhzoma II, before the conquest of 1519-1521. The Calendar Stone is a massive depiction of Aztec mythology. For example, inscribed in the stone, are 5 different suns which represent different eras. The fifth center sun represents the era that the Aztec in the early 1500’s were living in; the center sun is surrounded by the four previous suns that are named after the day that they ended. The Stone was originally thought to represent the Aztec calendar, but after further investigation over the years, the theory has changed. The Stone is now believed to have been laid vertically and was a cuauhxicalli meaning “eagle vessel”. This is where hearts would have been placed after they were removed in a sacrificial offering; it is also thought to be a temalacatl, a circular stone that was used for the gladiatorial sacrifice.

The burial of the Calendar Stone is estimated around the time of the second half of the sixteenth century and was not discovered until December 17th, 1790, underneath the Zocalo in Mexico City. The Stone is made of irregular basalt slab and weighs around twenty-four and half tons, with an eleven foot and five-inch diameter. The Calendar Stone is an unfinished piece that is an elaborate work of art and is filled with tons of symbolism found in Aztec mythology. Since its discovery, it has been one of the most recognizable symbols of the Aztec civilization and Mexico. The Calendar Stone has appeared as decoration on numerous items from official and popular culture; it has been replicated in bronze, silver, printed on merchandise, numerous photographs, and even printed on currency.

The Aztec Calendar Stone, became a very important national symbol during the Porfirio Diaz era. The Calendar Stone was used in the movement to unify the states of Mexico into a nation. The movement used the history and symbols of the indigenous people, particularly the Aztecs. Through this creation of a collection of indigenous history as one, it helped give birth to a nation because it gave Mexican citizens a unified background history. Today, the Calendar Stone is one of the most prominent symbols that represent Mexico because it embodies a deep cultural heritage of a sophisticated and advanced civilization. The Calendar Stone is currently located in the Museo Nacional De Antropoloía in Mexico City, where it is one of the biggest attractions.

For more (including 5 images) view the original article

Hierarchy is established in military systems to provide organization. Orders can be sent through the ranks by those of higher rank or status to their inferiors who will carry them out without question. For the Aztec this was no different, but with the importance of the military for cultural reasons the military hierarchy affected many levels of society.

Hierarchy was established from the day of birth for young boys, as the date of their birth gave a glimpse into the future as how mighty a warrior they would be. Whether they would be mighty or not however, they would still be sent from their homes during their childhood to start their life as warriors for the empire. Children of noble birth started their education at a young age, usually between six and thirteen, at a school called a calmecac. The program of this school was rigorous, covering not only combat training from Jaguar Knights and Eagle Warriors, but also the academic study of calendars, math, reading, and writing. Religious education was also a part of the curriculum as religion ties into all aspects of Aztec life. For everyone else in Aztec society, young boys would receive little training at home until they reached the age of fourteen. Then, they would be taken to telpochcalli. This is the military school for the common folk which are ran by older military veterans. Here, these children would be put in various tactical situations, teaching them troop movement, hand-to-hand combat, and mastery over numerous weapons. [1]

Once trained and proven as warriors, students of both schools could officially join the military as soldiers. Like all military systems there are prestige systems to raise your way through the ranks, whether it is through time put into service, brave deeds or other valiant actions. The Aztec system was a little different because ones rank was determined by the number of opponents they have captured on the battlefield. This was usually easier for students of the Calmecac School due not only to their superior training, but also to the social standing of their family. This is evident in the number of Jaguar Warriors that are of noble descent, compared to Jaguar Warriors who were commoners. To even become a Jaguar Warrior, a common soldier would need to capture four prisoners. Capturing a single prisoner was hard enough, but capturing any prisoners single handedly meant a promotion. It was not straight to Jaguar or Eagle Warrior, which are top of the line, but a promotion nevertheless which meant an upgrade in weaponry, armor, and title.

With promotion came responsibility, and the hierarchy holds separate jobs for high ranking soldiers besides simply being a warrior. Some veteran warriors of above average status would be teachers at the telpochcalli, while even older veterans would put up their weapons and become tacticians. Jaguar warriors and Eagle warriors held a large variety of roles in the temples in Tenochtitlan. Some would act as guards for these temples, while others played a more direct role in religious activities, like during the gladiatorial sacrifices at the Tizoc Stone, where Jaguar warriors would attack an armed captive that was tied to the stone. The calmecac school was a part of a temple, so Jaguar warriors would also train children through these temples. The study into this military hierarchy is important for understanding the Aztec and what they held as important aspects of life. With how engrained the military is in their society, whether it is training all male children to be warriors or the amount of respect and jobs given to these warriors, it is clear how important war was to their culture.

For more (including 3 images) view the original article

It was gold that caused the settlement of Alta California. History is repeating itself in Baja California, that New Italy, which is indeed the colophon (Kalifornia) of that great book—the world. The great Peninsula is too good a country to remain any longer a terra incognita.

B.A. Stephens

The Gold Fields of Lower California,

Los Angeles, March 8, 1889[1]

In February of 1889, the largest gold strike in Baja California's history sent thousands of prospectors from the United States to the port city of Ensenada.[2] One enterprising newspaperman, Bascom A. Stephens, an editor of the San Diego Sun, composed a 48-page guide called The Gold Fields of Lower California to assist prospectors hoping to find their fortune in Baja California. The manual provided valuable legal, geographical, and statistical information to help aspiring miners. Those that delved into the companion would have noticed one perk while reading: travelers could avoid annoying import and export taxes if they came to Ensenada as registered colonists of the International Company of Mexico (ICM).[3] In its helpful descriptions, Stephens left out one critical personal detail: he, along with fourteen other individuals, hoped to use this gold rush as a chance to filibuster (forcibly seize) Baja California from Mexico.

After the Mexican-American War, Mexico ceded vast tracts of land to the United States, including present-day California. While negotiating the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, the Mexican government deemed the coastal location of the Baja Peninsula necessary for national defense and its untapped resources too valuable to cede to the American government.[4] After the Gadsden Purchase ceded Southern Arizona and New Mexico land to the US in 1854, the US government stopped actively pursuing Mexican land. Some American civilians and politicians thought differently, seeking to annex parts of Northern Mexico, including Baja California.

Cavalier Americans continued filibuster attempts between 1850 and 1890, believing parts of Mexico could still be annexed and worrying the Mexican government. In 1876, Mexico’s new President, Porfirio Díaz, tried encouraging foreign investment to modernize Mexico while also bolstering Mexico’s stability and discouraging filibusters. American investments and filibuster expeditions in northern Mexico persisted during the Díaz regime.[5] In 1888 a group of ex-Confederates, California newspapermen, and adventurers styling themselves as the "Secret Order of the Golden Field" (the Order) plotted to bring men posing as miners to annex Baja away from Mexico. When their efforts failed, they tried again in 1890. These two filibusters failed due to overconfident planners revealing their plots to the local media, who exposed their plans. Without enough desire by owner capital to collaborate in the schemes, these failures to seize Baja California effectively ended white, American-led filibusters of Mexico.[6]

The Díaz government passed the Mexican Colonization Act of 1883, drawing foreign eager American interest in Mexico.[7] In 1884, American businessmen George Sisson and Luis Hueller represented the ICM in Mexico City and received a land grant from the Mexican government that spanned most of Baja California's area. The land grant came with resource and mineral rights, but the Order had other plans, namely recruiting miners to assist with their annexation of Baja.[8]

Two factors would arrest the 1888 filibuster's development. The first came from a land speculation bust during the year as investments in the area sputtered. This bust caused the population of San Diego (the American launching point for settlers into Mexico) to fall from 35,000 to 16,000 people. The fatal blow to the 1888 filibuster came from a California newspaper. After hearing of rumors of the filibuster, a reporter for the San Francisco Chronicle posed as a potential recruit to speak with Secret Order of the Golden Field organizer, Colonel J.K. Mulkey. Mulkey spelled out the Order's plans: to have (approximately 1500) laborers seize Baja California and proclaim the Republic of Northern Mexico. The report also caught a damning quote from Mulkey: "When the time comes, the Order will be so powerful…It will simply be the story of Texas over again."

With their plan exposed, some amendments came to the Order’s plans. When Mulkey realized the implications of his statements, he tried to walk back his claims saying he had lied to the Chronicle. The attention brought to Order's plan resulted in a delay to their plot until 1890.[9] The most significant change came from new foreign management in the area. In May of 1889, the English-backed Mexican Land and Colonization Company (MLCC) acquired the holdings of the flailing ICM. The owner of the MLCC, Sir Edward Jenkinson, owned a thriving coffee plantation and mining operation in Chiapas, Mexico, and sought to expand his holdings by buying up land rights in Baja California.

The Mexican government also reacted to the 1888 plot by appointing a special investigator, Manuel Sánchez Facio, to inspect the business dealings in Baja California.[10] Sánchez Facio's report alleged numerous breaches of the company charter according to Mexican colonization laws. He also found several other acts that made the company suspect. He strongly recommended that the Mexican government not deal with either company in Baja.[11]

Despite Sánchez Facio's warnings, the second plot continued to take shape in 1889. Jenkinson had appointed Londoner Buchanan Scott as manager of the company in the fall of 1888. One person described Scott's management of Baja California in 1889 as "far superior to any manager the company has ever had." Scott paid the leftover debts of the ICM and oversaw increased economic production in the mining districts. In the spring of 1890, Scott, seeking to bolster company fortunes in the region, agreed to fund the Order's second plot to filibuster Baja California away from the Mexican government.[12]

In April 1890, the reconstituted filibuster group met several times in San Diego to revive their hopes from 1888. This group believed the peninsula contained the ideal conditions for rebellion and secured a $100,000 pledge of aid from an enthusiastic Scott. The fifteen plotters devised a plan called The Grand Fandango to wrest the province from Mexico, putting themselves in the seat of power in Baja California.

The Grand Fandango called for the kidnapping of Baja California's governor with several preemptive steps to ensure their success. The plot hinged around an alcohol-fueled soiree involving the conspirators hosting the provincial governor and his coterie. Before the party, some of the plotters would smuggle and warehouse munitions-including Gatling guns and field cannons- into the town. Other members promised money for the venture to secure bribes for the army stationed in the city to stand down the night of the party. When the Mexican officials got drunk enough, the Americans would spring into action and take the governor into custody. Buchanan Scott also promised two British steamships to assist in controlling the port of Ensenada and suggested his American cohorts take control of a Mexican warship to provide naval support. By May, the group had built on the foundations of their revolutionary plot with soldier recruitment, flag design, and a list of acting members of the new government, most among the group of fifteen.[13] **

Similar to 1888, members' inability to keep secrets from newspapers compromised the chances of the 1890 plot. Captain Janes, a newer group member, spoke to a Los Angeles newspaper about the plot in April 1890.[14] Rumors fueled journalistic attention in the region, leading to the May 21, 1890, exposé in the San Diego Union entitled: "Filibusters Frustrated: Exposé of a Rattle-Brained Scheme to Capture Lower California." The paper, likely having spoken to a recruiter for the Order, spelled out the details of the Grand Fandango and concluded that the schemers named in the article "create distrust on the part of Mexico" and hindered trade relations between the US and Mexico. When media frenzy followed, the Secret Order of the Golden Field's existence faded from the record.[15]

Mexico and the US stepped up their security in response. Mexican officials prepared for other attempts on Baja California, while the US Secretary of State promised to prosecute any legitimate violations of neutrality laws. While rumors and reports of filibusters persisted after this event, no more American-led filibusters materialized after the 1890 fiasco. Attempts after the 1890 scandal most often involved disaffected Mexicans that sought to overthrow the Díaz government. These efforts would persist until the Mexican Revolution began in 1911.

In their failure, some reflections from the plotters suggest American white-nationalistic motivations for attempting such an audacious plan. Some of their brazen attitudes included arguing with a Mexican veteran and getting into an honor duel, while Bascom Stephens wrote an editorial boldly predicting that America would take Baja California sooner or later. Captain Janes, the jilted plotter whose words led to the San Diego Union’s exposé, continued to attempt filibusters in Latin America. He continued to believe that Baja California would eventually break away from Mexico.[16]

Sir Edward Jenkinson forced Buchanan Scott's resignation from the MLCC. Most sources absolve Jenkinson from wrongdoing in the scheme, rationalizing that he would not dare to jeopardize his profitable Chiapas-based holdings. Scott left Mexico and went to India to work for the British imperial administration in that country.[17]

For more (including 5 images) view the original article

The Maya ruins of Chichén Itzá (late-classic), located in the Yucatán Peninsula, hold the largest ball court in Mesoamerica. The Ball Court symbolized the underworld in the Maya cosmovision and appears in the Maya creation myth as depicted in The Popol Vuh (Book of Council). The Grand Ball Court of Chichén had multiple purposes and was an important site of sociopolitical power.

Architecture

 In Chichén Itzá, there are a total of 17 ball courts that received visitors from around this capital city for possible trials, matches, inaugurations, and even large celebrations. With a length of 460 feet, a width of 150 feet (including two 8-foot wide tilted walls), and a height of 25 feet, the Chichén Itzá ball court is the largest court yet discovered. On both walls are large rings, and friezes of seven characters said to represent the “teams.” The left wall includes men dressed in the same costume, possibly depicting the “home team”, while the right wall depicts men in various costumes, perhaps the “visitors.” Though experts are not sure if a “game” was actually ever played on this massive court, or even how the “game” might have been played, it is certain that many significant symbolic rituals took place here.

Symbolic Uses

Each Mesoamerican city includes a ball court, sometimes to represent the accession of a new king or as a way to exhibit the city’s growth or recovery from political change. Politically, this space had to do with power that held huge ceremonies and dances to show a new king was taking over. The ball (a rubber ball, ranging from the size of a softball to a soccer ball) would sometimes be handed to the new reigning king to symbolize power and divine knowledge.

Legally, the ball court could determine the fate of transgressors. Punishment could be meted. For the Maya, there was an opportunity to battle it out on the ball court. There would be a prosecutor versus the “defense attorney” whom could be hired to play in your spot if they gave someone a better chance of winning. Priests served as arbiters and interpreted innocence or guilt based upon the outcome of the game.

Cosmos Written in Stone

In the Popol Vuh, the ball court signifies a portal to the underworld. The Maya cosmovision holds three levels: the underworld, the terrestrial world, and the heavens. The architecture of the court was usually built in an I-shaped form, with two parallel walls consisting of benches for the spectators, while the north tower was reserved for the ruler and other political elites. The North Tower represents the “heavens”, the two side parallel walls, seating the indigenous people were considered “earth”, and the ball court itself lower than the rest, the “underworld”.

For more (including 7 images) view the original article

The lights begin to dim, silent whispers rumble through the excited crowd around me. Lights flood the stage, smoke quickly cascades and ripples through the space. Percussions and woodwinds creep in crescendo, calling to centuries of culture, transporting us through time and space. Individuals march in unison filling the stage, guided by the music. The formation breaks and the cloths, patterns, and beads begin to shake, the trail to Mexicanidad begins to take shape, inhabiting each dancer. Each becomes a guide, an invitation. Welcome to The Ballet Folklórico de Amalia Hernandez, a manifestation of Mexican pride, folklore, and transformations.

The Cold War significantly influence global changes and international relations. One of the most important aspects of México’s cultural influence, which focused on the diplomatic and commercial was Ballet Folklórico. Ballet Folklórico was a key part of México's strategy for national liberation since it fostered goodwill, helped the country dismantle its third world status, and supported the country's economic and social independence.

Analyzing how Amalia Hernández formed unique creative concepts and performances is crucial to comprehending Ballet Folklórico's influence. Waldeen Falkenstein and Miguel Covarrubias, her closest mentors, believed in transforming México’s arts into contemporary representations of Mexican culture and pride. Falkenstein and Covarrubias recognized and cultivated Hernández to develop her choreography skills. They encouraged her to learn about Mexican folk traditions in order to depart from it and create new art work, a contemporary interpretation of Mexican tradition. Amalia Hernández, on the other hand, approached modern art with the intention of incorporating folk traditions.

Although there were conflicts among Mexican artists over issues of nationalism and aesthetics, when they represented México abroad, they joined together as a unified force. Performances overseas featured modern and folk choreography, the latter garnering greater attention. During the 1940s, the Mexican President praised Amalia Hernández' Ballet Folklórico for exhibiting emblematic elements of Mexican national culture. By the 1950s, this creative divide had become known as the "cactus curtain," a metaphor for the "iron curtain”. Surpassing the divide, Amalia Hernández permanently altered Mexican identity, cultural growth, and political interpretations.

Ballet Folklórico became an internationally recognized form of ballet and a revolutionary representation of diverse regional Mexican elements. Through its choreography and artistic expressions, it revolutionized both classical ballet and the traditional folk arts. The Mexican National Institute of Fine Arts supplied auspices to Ballet Folklórico, which helped the Amalia Hernández dance company attain fame on a global scale. The Ballet Folklórico dance group had achieved success in numerous international dance competitions by the middle of the 1960s, contributing significantly to México’s cultural identity.

The Cold War was a time of conflict involving capitalism and communism, principally between the US and the Soviet Union, but it also affected nations that were not directly involved in those hostilities. Developing countries that were neutral in the Cold War conflict between the US and the Soviet Union were affected differently; they bore the burdens that came with being classified as Third-World countries. The developing nations, who were stigmatized as belonging to the Third World due in part to their neutral attitudes during the Cold War, redirected their attention to national liberation. Third World nation-states that had been colonized or remained under the control of imperialist powers banded together through resistance and self- determination movements.

Under the leadership of the Bandung Conference in 1955, emerging nations, including Mexico, formed non-alliance organizations to avoid being subjugated by the opposing sides of the Cold War. Sovereignty, territorial integrity, nation-to-nation equality, non-interference in internal affairs, and peaceful coexistence were the guiding themes of the Bandung Conference. Through his activities both before and after becoming President, Adolfo López Mateos echoed this movement.

Along with advancements to industrialization, agriculture, and health programs, he signed a labor agreement with the United States. The United States-México labor treaty was drafted with his help as labor minister before to becoming president of México, making him particularly well-liked at the time. President Mateos was also well recognized for advancing industrialization, agrarian reforms, and public health initiatives during his presidency.

President Mateos deserves a great deal of credit for establishing México as a sought-after player on the global stage during his administration. The Latin American policy put forth by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1933 is a part of earlier international relations between the United States and México. The policy sought for amicable relations and a ban on armed intervention between the states of the Western Hemisphere. Although these previously established ties existed between México and the United States, the transnational mobilizations of the 1960s gave rise to a bilateral framework that included domestic and international developments in México.

While supporting México's new global position, President Kennedy aimed to stifle Mexican internationalism. This was because México's dependence on the United States was advantageous for the United States economically, strategically, and diplomatically. Independence shook this firm grasp and alliance the U.S. aimed to keep. In order to highlight México's potential for tourism marketing, President Kennedy's itinerary to México was infused with abundant cultural imagery. His visit provided México with the ideal chance to promote its meticulously constructed tourism industry, built on important folkloric-cosmopolitan imagery.

None other than the Ballet Folklorico performances by Amalia Hernández were on President Kennedy's agenda. Despite winning international competitions and gaining international recognition, the Mexican Ministry of Tourism prioritized strengthening Mexico-US cooperation. As a result, the Mexican tourism industry transformed from a beach destination to one ready to showcase the thriving fine arts scene filled with varied traditional and modern characteristics.

Amalia Hernandez created Ballet Folklórico out of her passion for Mexican culture, customs, and modern dance. Mexico needed a vehicle to promote its culture abroad if it was to break free from its dependence on the United States and overcome its political and economic constraints. The international triumph of Amalia Hérnandez was not the only thing that changed for her or the Mexican culture. A nationwide rebuilding of how Mexican citizens were exposed to their ancestors' cultural practices, took place. Innovative choreography by Amalia Hernandez interprets local, political, and interpersonal folklore. Likewise, Mexico improved its sense of national identity, fine arts, tourism industry, and political ties.

I would like to thank Professor Charles Heath II for his guidance and encouragement throughout this project, as well as Research Librarian Kristina Claunch for producing and sharing valuable research guides.

For more (including 6 images) view the original article

Plaza Mariana is the current name for the area in Northern Mexico City south of Tepeyac Hill. The area has long been a cultural center even before the arrival of the Spanish. The scale of the area has grown over the years, especially in the last few decades, but continues to be an area of cultural importance.

Before the arrival of the Spanish and with them Catholicism, some Aztec groups used this area to worship the mother goddess Tonantzin, going as far as building a temple at the base of Tepeyac Hill. Some time after the arrival of the Spanish the temple was destroyed and a chapel put in its place, though the exact date of the chapel's construction is debated.

Historical records from between 1556 and 1575 make references to the chapel but make no mention of its exact construction date or more importantly to the story that makes up the other argument for an exact date. While the historical evidence points to sometime between 1555 and 1556, the Catholic Church has long supported the legend of Juan Diego and the Lady of Guadalupe as an explanation of when and why the chapel was built.

The story says that in December 1531, the Lady of Guadalupe appeared to a mestizo Christian named Juan Diego near Tepeyac Hill. She told him to tell the bishop Juan de Zumárraga to build a chapel at the base of the hill. Zumárraga did not believe Juan Diego and wanted proof that it was the true Lady of Guadalupe that had appeared to him. She gave Juan Diego fresh roses to carry in his tilma and show to Zumárraga. When Juan Diego opened his tilma the roses spilled out and an image of the Lady of Guadalupe appeared on the cloth. Zumárraga swiftly requisitioned the construction of a church. So while historical records point to a date around 1555, the story supported by the church points to an earlier date between 1531 and 1532. Interestingly, the story itself didn't appear in print until 1648 in a book by a priest named Miguel Sanchez. When asked why this was the first time anyone had heard of this story, he said that people had simply forgotten the story. While the date of the first chapel is still disputed, the other buildings at Plaza Mariana are much less of a mystery.

Some time after the first chapel's construction it was replaced by another chapel that is today called the Ex-Parroquia de Indios. Inside of this chapel you can see the foundation of the original chapel. More outward dedication to the Juan Diego legend began in 1695 with the beginning of the Templo Expiatorio a Cristo Rey, also called the Old Basilica or the Sinking Church. Construction was completed in 1709 and was the first to house the tilma with the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe. The church reached its peak in 1904 when it was given the status of Basilica. In 1921, a bomb inside of a flower pot exploded damaging the building interior but the tilma was not damaged. As the years went on the foundation of the Basilica began to sink into the ground. Rather than demolishing the Basilica, it was restored and a new Basilica built next door to replace it. Between 1974 and 1976, today's main attraction, the Basílica de Nuestra Señora de Guadalupe, was built and now houses the original tilma from the Juan Diego story.

For more (including 5 images) view the original article

A major center for religion, politics, and economics of the Rio Bec region, Becán is a fascinating city of the ancient Maya during the Classic Period. It depicts the Rio Bec style, and has representations of two of their gods: Kinichna and the Witz Monster.

According to the signage at the site, Becán means trench, and was named so because of the 2-kilometer-long trench that circles most the city. Another translation states that it means “road of the serpent”. There are several roads, or sacbe, going from the city of Becán, that possibly lead to the cities they ruled over as the leader in economics and religious acts. The oldest buildings are dated to approximately 550 CE, and Becán reached its peak around 600-800 CE. It is a great representation of the Rio Bec and Chenes architectural style.

The Rio Bec architecture style is represented in the way the buildings were constructed, laid out, and decorated. In the Rio Bec region, buildings were usually placed on a quadrangular base. There were several chambers on each of the different levels of the temples. Towers are also a Rio Bec feature, although these may have been just for show. Cross and checkerboards are used as decorative flourishes in this style. Also, images of serpents were used regularly, and gives credit to the other translation of Becán as “road of the serpent”.

Representations of the Sun God Kinichna and Witz “Earth” Monster are both found on temples at Becán and are incredible condition considering the time since this city was last occupied. The statue of Kinichna is found on Structure X, is made from stucco and it is enclosed behind a glass case to further preserve it as the condition is better than most. The depiction of the Witz Monster is located at the top of Structure IX. There was once a sculpture of the Earth Monster on each side of the staircase, but only the one remains. It is a wonderful thing to see, and the best view of it is standing in front of it near the top of the temple.

The excavation that Ricardo Bueno C. and others have done at Becán has allowed us to see a different style of Maya architecture and style at a major regional center. Representations of their Gods also allow to see once again how important their religion was to them. Ricardo Bueno C is commemorated at the entrance of the site.

For more (including 8 images) view the original article

Cruz Leon Martinez was just a newlywed when he was approached by his friends with a way to earn extra money. He and five of his friends traveled to Mexico City to obtain contracts for agricultural work in America. They each began work as braceros on May 8th, 1943. Martinez travelled by train for a week until he reached his contracted location. Once there he was tasked with picking beets. He recalls living in a metal warehouse with approximately 200 other men. Once the men were finished clearing one farm of its crops, they would be moved to another. This continued until winter came and the men’s work contracts had been completed. Martinez admits that he never read over his contract before starting work, but realized at the end of his four and a half months of work, he had only received payment for three months. Martinez returned to Mexico until his second contract started. This time, he and his friends were treated like “little donkeys” by the ranch owners. He and six men lived in a small, one bedroom house with no bathroom. They used hoses outside to wash themselves at night.[1]

Rafael Morales Medoza left his wife in October of 1950 to search for work in “the north”. He recalled his bracero work as “hard” and described bending over, using shorthand hoes, to work mile long rows of crops. With a smile, Morales then told about his new employer taking all the workers to town in the back of his pickup and buying them hamburgers.[2] Many men like Cruz Leon Martinez and Rafael Morales Mendoza possess both difficult and rewarding memories of the Bracero Program, yet these testimonies and secondary researchers have shown that the program created many strong ties between the United States and Mexico and it is overall seen positively by former guest workers.

The entrance of America into World War II created a need for agricultural workers. Guest worker programs between Mexico and the United States were not a new occurrence. Previously, Mexican migrant workers experienced severe mistreatment and were left stranded when their work contracts expired. However, negotiations between Mexico and the United States changed under the Good Neighbor Policy; Mexico was put on equal footing to the U.S. and in a prime position to ensure their demands were met. This allowed the country to get more of what it was expecting out of the program and take a step in the right direction of a strong relationship with the United States.[3] Past guest worker experiences and the bolstering of the Good Neighbor Policy fueled Mexican policy makers in negotiations for the “Agreement between the United States of America and Mexico Respecting the Temporary Migration of Mexican Workers,” or more commonly known as, the Bracero Program. Mexico specifically stipulated that the United States would pay for transportation, living expenses, and repatriation of all bracero workers. It was also a requirement that Mexico be able to suspend the program in states where migrant workers were being mistreated and expectations of the program were not being met. The Bracero Program officially began on July 23, 1942.[4]

Deborah Cohen, an American historian who examines social inequalities in Latin America , argues that one expectation from Mexico was to send migrants to the U.S. to experience the modernization there and bring it back to Mexico. The hope was for workers to “learn modern farming techniques and work ethic”. The program started less than three decades after the Mexican Revolution, with Mexico still in a nation building phase. Workers were encouraged to consume American goods like radios and televisions and American clothing, in the hopes that it would increase industrialization in Mexico.[5] Workers from the Rio Vista Farm, a bracero processing center in Socorro, Texas, recall the guest workers returning home with bicycles, sewing machines, and other modern technology strapped to the tops of the buses returning to Mexico.[6]

As part of Mexico’s negotiations, it could exclude states from the Bracero Program based on mistreatment of workers. For the first five years of the program, Texas was excluded from because of their long history of discrimination towards Mexicans and Mexican-Americans. The blacklisting of Texas from the program was a political stance for Mexico, defending her honor after the longstanding negative relationship between Texas and Mexico citizens. However, rather than comply with Mexico’s requirements, the Texas blacklist led to illegal immigration, which held no expectation of fair treatment or wages for migrant workers.[7] Changes to the guest worker agreement in 1943 allowed direct recruitment of workers at the Mexican border. This removed the U.S. government from the process, allowing for little to no accountability for farmers to comply with the program’s requirements.[8]

Hopeful bracero workers gathered en masse at the Ciudad Juárez recruiting center, directly across the Mexican-American border from El Paso, because historically, workers were hired more quickly from recruiting centers. On October 13, 1948 border patrol officers opened the gates, letting in thousands of undocumented workers. The El Paso Incident, as this event became known, undermined Mexico's ability to negotiate with the United States and left these workers without protection of the Bracero Program. As undocumented migration, increased Mexico pushed for harder restrictions on growers for employing undocumented workers and for increased border patrol. This only increased the efforts that these workers would go to find work in the United States, and also undermined the program because the employers did not have to comply with the measures set in place by the Bracero Program. To protect undocumented workers, they were quickly placed under bracero contracts, even though Texas was technically banned from the program,thus, making Texas eligible for participation in the Bracero Program.[9]

Francisco Uviñvo joined a caravan of buses from San Luis de Cordero, Durango to Chihuahua City, Mexico in 1953, to register for the Bracero Program. Uviñvo’s first memories of Texas were of the fumigation lines at Rio Vista Farm, one of five bracero processing centers in Texas. Upon arrival, braceros underwent medical examinations to ensure their fitness for labor. After waiting months at recruitment centers, receiving a contract, and being transported to America, migrants still ran the risk of getting turned away because of these examinations. One former bracero recounted, “Well dressed and well spoken men” were rejected. Many recall being asked to remove all their clothing in order to be sprayed with DDT to prevent the spread of lice. When Uviñvo and his family were invited back to Rio Vista Farm for a 75th anniversary celebration of the Bracero Program in 2017, Uviñvo was very hesitant and told his family “you don’t know what they did to us there”. The majority of negative memories about the program come from these medical examinations.[10]

Mistreatment and harsh conditions from employers was not forgotten, but as a general theme, former braceros focus on their hard work and rewards from their experience in the program. Many are proud of the work they did and the lives that they were able to build for their families. Contrary to what Cohen expected from interviews with former migrant workers, they did not focus on the unfair treatment and unmet expectations the bracero program promised, but recalled optimistically. The Bracero History Archive is brimming with stories of these former braceros’ children that share the story of the sacrifices their fathers made for their families upward mobility. Surveys conducted showed that the majority, over three-fourths of braceros, chose migrant labor for economic reasons, rather than to advance their farming knowledge, which was Mexico’s rationale for the program. The main migrants for the Bracero Program were rural farmers that would earn higher wages in America for the same type of job they were doing at home. With a rising population, Mexico struggled to provide for its people. At the height of the bracero program, remittances made up a third of Mexico’s economy. In the program's peak year of 1957, half a million men sought out the program for employment. In the lifespan of the program, five million braceros were contracted for work, not including the approximate three million undocument migrant workers. The favor of Mexican migrants of the Bracero Program can be seen through its popularity, longevity, and economic benefits to Mexico.[11]

The Bracero Program officially ended in 1964. By that time, American farmers had begun using large machinery to take the place of manual labor.[12] Many former braceros possess difficult memories from this time; yet, it cannot be denied that just as many have a great sense of pride for the work they did for the program. These men contributed to the war effort by keeping the agriculture economy stable, sent remittances and occasionally consumer goods back for their families, and many earned enough extra money to create new and better lives for their growing families. The largest contribution the braceros had was a continued relationship with the United States.

For more (including 5 images) view the original article

On August 22, 1895, Dr. R. D. Spalding traveled to Mexico City with a committee representing the Atlanta Cotton States and International Exposition. Upon entering the Mexican palace, the vice chairman presented an invitation to President Porfirio Diaz requesting his personal attendance to Atlanta’s event. In a speech given by Dr. Spalding, President Diaz was urged to contribute an exhibit representing the nation’s products and raw materials, that they, being sister republics, might grow closer in trade. The President was so ecstatic with the manner of the Americans that he interrupted Dr. Spalding mid-speech exclaiming, “I have fallen in love with you already!” A couple days later, Dr. Spalding traveled about 400 kilometers to San Luis Potosi where Governor Carlos Diez Gutierrez invited the Americans to view the city’s massive silver smelter, enjoy several concerts, and discuss the exposition. Dr. Spalding and a senior committee comrade attended a properly executed Mexican bullfight, reportedly, to their incredible enjoyment.

World’s fairs were massively popular, large, and expensive events enjoyed and pursued by people from all across the globe. Not only a great source of fun and excitement, but fairs gave various organizations, states, and countries an opportunity to present their cultures, resources, industries, and architecture for the rest of the world to see. One such fair was the Cotton States and International Exposition of Atlanta, Georgia held at Piedmont Park from September 18, 1895, through December 31, 1895. Stated in the Official Guide to the Cotton States and International Exposition, “the prime object [of the exposition is] to cultivate closer trade relations with South, Central, and Latin American republics.” In the late nineteenth century, the South underwent massive political, societal, economical, and industrial transformations. Some southern leaders and capitalists worked to embrace these shifts and build a New South, which would gain trade relationships with the North, as well as internationally. They wanted to sell the raw materials their land provided: cotton, tobacco, lumber, and coal being at the top of the list. The New South believers had two, most-recognized goals for hosting their exposition: boosterism and increasing trade relations with Mexico, Central, and South American markets. Upon researching Mexico’s role at the exposition, some fascinating information is revealed. Yet little is discussed about how the Mexican government took advantage of this particular world fair. Instead, despite the intensity with which southern and Mexican diplomats and capitalists pursued each other, scholars find a plethora of stories about bullfights and sword fights. [2]

President Diaz promoted the Cotton States and International Exposition around his nation and alerted the committee that a large space would be needed for a planned elaborate Mexican Village. Indeed, a map found in the Official Guide reveals that the Village sat on the largest parcel for an individual nation at Piedmont Park. Drawn on the map are the bullpen, the music stand which would host the Mexican Eighth Regiment military band, a cathedral, and theater. It is apparent by the many newspaper articles printed in Georgia that Mexico was of great interest to southerners, however, not much was found about the particular products and trade ventures resulting from the exposition. Instead, an incredible controversy reveals itself. That is of the proposed bullfights.

Folks all across the nation apparently took issue with the idea of watching bulls be tormented by waving red flags and metal lances, with the potential for ultimate death. This common source of entertainment in Mexico was suddenly under intense scrutiny, including by a southern public who ironically had been forced to cease torturing a whole race of humans just a few decades earlier. On July 25th, the Christian Index published an article disgracing the exposition board for deciding to compromise, allowing the fights if the bulls were not harmed or killed during the show. They referred to the event as being an example of “Mexican barbarism” and claimed that it would be “a mistake to offer such things as educational features.” These harsh accusations reveal judgement and prejudice toward Mexico. Rather than embrace the fights, under the compromise of bull safety, as an acceptable contribution to the exhibit of Mexican culture, many southerners used the example to demoralize Mexican culture. Several times, variations of the word “barbarian” were used. The fact that the Mexican commissionaires were willing to move forward with the bullfights in a softer depiction was not enough to satisfy the naysayers. The exposition President, C. A. Collier, wrote a letter which was partly published in the local newspapers that in order to protect the board’s image, it was decided that the bullfights would not be permitted. This letter was printed just a few days after Dr. Spalding’s splendid experience at the Mexican bullfight he attended in San Luis Potosi. [3]

As the story develops, we see that on September 18th another article is published. Prior to exhibit preparations, Mexican Village commissioner Mr. J. M. Porteous, had agreed to a contract with exposition authorities which stated that the bullfights would be allowed, and he had moved forward under this assumption. When questioned on the issue, Porteous asserted that if the committee did not allow him to carry on with the shows, he would sue them. On September 23rd, five days after opening day, a resolution still had not been made. The reality was that both the exposition committee, and the Mexican Village manager had widely advertised the bullfighting as a main attraction of the exposition, and it seemed a difficult decision to make with the public demanding that the barbaric torture of bulls be erased from the program. [4]

Less than two weeks after opening day, the frustrated Mr. Porteous had another debacle to face. It appears that two Mexican men engaged in a violent fight for love. It was said that the two men involved, one being a matador (a bullfighter), the other a “lazador” (the person who lasso’s the bull), were vying for the same lady’s attention. When one succeeded in taking her on a romantic walk, the other proposed a duel. The Macon Telegraph claims that one man had been badly wounded in the side, “blood spurting,” when Mr. Porteous arrived, just in time to save the lover from a “death-dealing stab.” Despite some journalists embellishing otherwise, no one was severely injured, nor was anyone arrested. Yet this sword fight made it into various newspapers for several days. Amongst tens of thousands of people, hundreds of displays, and innumerable opportunities for entertainment, a brief fight between two Mexican men was of great amusement and mockery to the general southern public.[5]

Finally, by November 2^nd, Mr. Porteous and his fellow commissionaires won, sort of. A month and a half after the fair commenced, visitors would be welcomed to see the highly controversial bullfight show. Compromises were made; an arena was quick-built just outside the fairgrounds and the bullfighting was to be of the “sham” version. Journalists claimed that the fights were still very exciting despite the taming of “the horrible spectacle that characterizes” a true Mexican bullfight of the day. The potential for the fighters to be hurt ensured the attraction would still be one of the most talked about of the exposition, despite its final place outside the exposition walls. 

[6]

On October 3^rd, after visiting a few other cities along the way, Governor Gutierrez arrived at Atlanta to be welcomed by the exposition board, as the man who would be the most important Mexican attendee to the exposition. The governor was overwhelmed with the honor and friendship he received on his tour of America, never having been there before. The expectations he had of Atlanta were exceeded. Publicly, he had nothing but gratitude and hopeful anticipation for relations between the sister republics, although the newspaper could not even bother to spell the prominent governor’s name correctly. The ironic truth that the Governor so innocently described was that until the railroads had been built connecting the South to Mexico, to him, a place like Atlanta might have been as distant in geography and culture as Africa. Of further irony is part of a speech he gives concerning his American welcome where he claims that there is “no knife” that could sever the friendship between Mexico and America. Despite such obvious communication and desire for Mexican/American trade relationships, very little seems to have come from this particular fair in terms of Mexico. Nor were any stories printed about Mexico and the Cotton States and International Exposition more superfluous than those about the bullfights and sword fights. It seems that no matter how the Mexican and American governments wanted to partake in respectful and mutually beneficial relationships, some American people would only ever view their sister republic as “barbaric.”[7]

Thank you to History Librarian, Kristina Claunch and Newton Grisham Library at Sam Houston State University for the help in securing great resources toward this research project. Further mucho graçias to History Professor Dr. Charles Heath. Your encouragement, recommendations, and academic support have been so meaningful.

For more (including 5 images) view the original article

Located in the southern portion of the Yucatan Peninsula, Calakmul sits within an ecological preserve of 331,397 hectares, surrounded by a buffer zone of an additional 391,788 hectares. Together, this vast territory makes up the Calakmul Biosphere Reserve. Since the decline of Calakmul and other nearby Mayan cities around 900 C.E., this area has remained undeveloped. It is, therefore, easy to understand why the site remained undiscovered by outsiders until 1931. At that time, Cyrus Longworth Lundell (1907-1994), a native of Austin, Texas, and one-time student at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas, traveled to Campeche, Mexico, as a representative of the Tropical Plant Foundation in Washington, D.C., and the American chewing gun industry. While searching for chicle (natural gum) in an uncharted area of Campeche, he learned about the ruins of a lost Mayan city from locals, which he named Calakmul, “the city of two adjacent mounds.” This proved to be only the first of 16 ancient cities and other Mayan sites that he discovered. In 1932, Lundell informed Sylvanus Morley, then working at Chichen Itza, about the Calakmul site and his count of roughly sixty stelae there. Morely then organized the first Carnegie Institution of Washington expedition to the site in April 1932. This was followed by three additional surveys, ending in 1938, which resulted in the mapping of the city’s central area and the recording of 103 stelae.

Although the Calakmul Biosphere Reserve is largely uninhabited today, from 500 B.C.E. to roughly 1,000 C.E., it was home to a number of Mayan urban developments. The largest settlement was the city of Calakmul itself, which served as the seat of the Snake Kingdom -- called Kaan -- one of the most powerful Maya dynasties during the Late Classic Period. Represented by a snake head glyph, Calakmul fought with both Tikal and Palenque for regional dominance. With more than 6,200 buildings in a core area of 30 square kilometers (11.5 square miles), it was more densely settled than Tikal and had more stelae (115 to 130) than any other Maya city. Unfortunately, the stelae at the site are so badly eroded that archaeologists and epigraphers are having to piece together much of Calakmul’s history from records left in other areas. For example, the site of Dzibanche, about 200 kilometers to the northeast, provides an early reference to Calakmul. There, Yaknoom Ch’een, the Snake King, is shown receiving captives. Unfortunately, there are no references to a king at Calakmul itself until the seventh century. Even the painted vessels that archaeologists have found describing Calakmul’s 19 kings have proved problematic, since they don’t match the record presented in the stone stelae that can be read.

What we do know about Calakmul is that it began to appear in the glyphic record at Yaxchilan (537 C.E.) and Naranjo (546 C.E.). By 561, the King of Calakmul, Sky Witness, turned a large city, Caracol, against its ally and protector, the powerful state of Tikal. By 562, Calakmul and Caracol defeated Tikal, and Sky Witness attended the execution of Tikal king’s Wak Chan K’awill. This began a “hiatus” in Tikal’s record, which lasted 130 years.

Some Mayanists have suggested that Calakmul targeted Tikal because of that state’s link to Teotihuacan, the largest pre-Columbian city every built in the Americas just north of modern day Mexico City. The imagery of Teotihuacan had spread throughout the Peten region by the sixth century and existed everywhere but Calakmul. Both Naranjo and Caracol stopped displaying Teotihuacan symbolism when they shifted to Calakmul’s side. In fact, after defeating Tikal, Calakmul allowed the city to keep its kings, but the state was forbidden from displaying Teotihuacan’s imagery. So, perhaps Calakmul wanted the Maya region to be totally independent from Teotihuacan’s sway. Whatever the case, Calakmul began to decline during the eighth century CE.

For more (including 12 images) view the original article

Located in the southern portion of the Yucatan Peninsula, Calakmul sits within an ecological preserve of 819,000 acres, surrounded by a buffer zone of an additional 968,000 acres. Together, this vast territory makes up the Calakmul Biosphere Reserve. Since the decline of Calakmul and other nearby Mayan cities around 900 C.E., this area has remained undeveloped. It is, therefore, easy to understand why the site remained undiscovered by outsiders until 1931. At that time, Cyrus Longworth Lundell (1907-1994), a native of Austin, Texas, and one-time student at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas, traveled to Campeche, Mexico, as a representative of the Tropical Plant Foundation in Washington, D.C., and the American chewing gun industry. While searching for chicle (natural gum) in an uncharted area of Campeche, he learned about the ruins of a lost Mayan city from locals, which he named Calakmul, “the city of two adjacent mounds.” This proved to be only the first of 16 ancient cities and other Mayan sites that he discovered. In 1932, Lundell informed Sylvanus Morley, then working at Chichen Itza, about the Calakmul site and his count of roughly sixty stelae there. Morely then organized the first Carnegie Institution of Washington expedition to the site in April 1932. This was followed by three additional surveys, ending in 1938, which resulted in the mapping of the city’s central area and the recording of 103 stelae.

Although the Calakmul Biosphere Reserve is largely uninhabited today, from 500 B.C.E. to roughly 1,000 C.E., it was home to a number of Mayan urban developments. The largest settlement was the city of Calakmul itself, which served as the seat of the Snake Kingdom -- called Kaan -- one of the most powerful Maya dynasties during the Late Classic Period. Represented by a snake head glyph, Calakmul fought with both Tikal and Palenque for regional dominance. With more than 6,200 buildings in a core area of 30 square kilometers (11.5 square miles), it was more densely settled than Tikal and had more stelae (115 to 130) than any other Maya city. Unfortunately, the stelae at the site are so badly eroded that archaeologists and epigraphers have been forced to piece together much of Calakmul’s history from records left in other areas.

Stela 51 at Calakmul is an exception to the general rule about eroded monuments at the site. Sylvanus Morley described it as “the most beautiful monument at Calakmul.” It was discovered with others at the base of Structure I by Cyrus Lundell in 1931 and first documented on the Carnegie Institution’s expedition to the site in 1932. The stela was stolen at some point in the 1960s, when it was cut into portable slabs, but later recovered. It now stands in the Maya section of the National Museum of Anthropology in Mexico City. [1]

The central portrait is that of the Calakmul king Yuknoom Took’ K’awiil, who erected the monument in 731 CE, making it one of the last of his reign. Yuknoom Took’ K’awiil ruled at Calakmul from 702 to 736, during which time he sponsored no fewer than twenty monuments at the site. Despite Calakmul’s defeat by Tikal in 695 CE, Yuknoom Took’ K’awiil was mentioned at Dos Pilas in 702 and Waka around the same time, suggesting that previous alliances remained intact. Even so, it seems likely that Yuknoom Took’ K’awiil’s reign probably ended in another defeat at the hands of Tikal’s great king, Yik’in Chan K’awiil in 736 CE. [2]

For more (including 4 images) view the original article

The Paseo de Montejo, considered the “Champs Elysee" of the city of Mérida, features two almost identical French-styled houses that locals and tourists alike find fascinating. Built by Camilo and Ernesto Cámara Zavala, "Las Casas Gemelas" (The Twin Houses) were inaugurated on December 24, 1911. The family built its wealth on henequen and was one of the five richest families in town. Camilo and Ernesto commissioned the plans for the buildings to architect Gustave Umbdenstock, a professor at the École Polytechnique and director of Paris' 'École des Beaux-Arts. Mérida’s bourgeoisie adopted the Beaux-Arts style to display their power and wealth. Local engineer Manuel Cantón Ramos built the houses. Upon closer inspection, the houses are not identical. The southern house has a third floor, a French roof, windows coherent in style, and a front door covered by a curved wrought iron canopy. The northern house contains Spanish architectural elements, such as a terraced top and windows with decorated blinds.

The Barbachano and Molina Méndez families owned the two houses. Each family played a prominent role in Mérida's high society during the Porfiriato (1874-1910). In Barbarous Mexico (1910), journalist John Kenneth Turner described his encounter with a leading henequen empressario. The man wore a white diamond ring and laughed when describing the brutal measures used to control the Maya, Korean, and Yaqui workers, saying they "demand it."

The Barbachano and Molina Méndez families continue to accumulate wealth on the back of indigenous labor. The Barbachanos own several hotels and tourist facilities, and the Molina Méndez hold a cruise ship concession. During the Porfiriato, artists, poets, and writers held lively cultural events at the Barbachano house. In the twentieth century, the Barbachanos hosted such luminaries as Princecess Grace and Prince Ranieri of Monaco, as well as first lady of the U.S., Jacqueline Kennedy. 

Today, the northern house remains the Molina family’s primary residence. Since October 18, 1982, the Mérida historic center is protected by strict preservation laws that limit useage and modification of the homes. In a 2014 interview with a local newspaper, Maruja Barbachano Herrero proposed the possible donation of her property to the city so that it might be opened to the public. Ideally, the house could serve as a museum of the Porfiriato in Mérida, a crucial era in the city's history, but one that demands attention. As pf June 2016, however, no steps have been taken toward the transfer of the property.

For more (including 7 images) view the original article

Templo Mayor, located in downtown Mexico City, has an adjacent museum that proudly displays artifacts and renditions of items from the Mesoamerican civilizations. The top floor of this museum contains a recreated statue of the Mayan bat god, Camazotz (also known as Zotzilaha Chamalcan). The name Camazotz translates to either ‘death bat’ or ‘snatch bat’. This deity appears in the Popol Vuh and is still a very prominent figure in the continuing Maya religion.

Camazotz is described as an anthropomorphized leaf-nosed bat. This has led to conjecture about the source of the myth. Some believe the ancient peoples based him on the common vampire bat or on Desmodus draculae, a much larger species, both leaf-nosed as well. Both of these species inhabited the area of Oaxaca, Mexico in 100 A.D. when a bat deity was first mentioned in a cult of the Zapotec tribe. The Zapotecs believed bats represented night, death, and sacrifice. This was likely due to the fact that the bats would inhabit the caves around the sacred cenotes, which the Mesoamericans believed were portals to the underworld. It would be a very chilling sight at dusk when the bats would swarm out of these ‘portals’ and begin drinking the blood of the other animals. The god is also commonly depicted holding a sacrificial knife in one hand and a human heart or sacrificial victim in the other.

Camazotz was eventually adopted into the mythology of the K’iche’ (or Quiché) Maya in Guatemala, though they merged him with their god of fire, Zotzilaha Chamalcan. Though, in the Popol Vuh, Zotzilaha was the name of the House of Bats in the underworld where the hero twins were forced to spend the night by the lords of Xibalba. The legend is that the hero twins slept inside their blowguns as protection from the bats (referred to as Camazotz). However, when the bats went silent, Xbalanqué asked Hunahpú to check if dawn had come and Hunahpú did so by poking his head out of the tube. But, in fact, it was not yet dawn and one of the bats took the opportunity to swoop down and rip away Hunahpú’s head, leaving him decapitated. Xbalanqué was left inside the tube, questioning what his brother was seeing and why he had gone so still without receiving any answers. The bat then took the head of Hunahpú to the ball court of the Xibalba lords to be gruesomely displayed and used as a ball while the lords rejoiced in their assumed victory. Later in the Popol Vuh, a messenger from the underworld in the form of a humanoid bat (believed to be Camazotz) appears to broker a deal between humanity and Lord Tohil, the patron god of the K’iche’. In this deal, mankind promised their armpits and their waists in exchange for fire which is how the ritual of cutting open a person’s breast in sacrifice came to be. Some myths claim that, during the day, Camazotz would turn into a stone statue and therefore could only move at night, but this has not been confirmed.

For more (including 5 images) view the original article

The Cathedral of Puebla is a Baroque style cathedral in the City of Puebla, the capital of the state of Puebla. The cathedral is located on the southern edge of the Zocalo de Puebla but has its side doors instead of its main doors facing the plaza. Construction on the cathedral began in 1575 under the architects Francisco Becerra and Juan de Cigorondo. While construction was delayed between 1626 and 1634 due to mismanagement and lack of funds, it resumed during the time of Bishop Juan de Palafox y Mendoza.

Palafox spent most of his time in New Spain, from 1640 until 1655, trying to combat the Jesuits and convince them to pay tithes that was required of them by the Vatican. The tithes were an important part of the church structure because they were to be used to fund the building of churches and cathedrals throughout New Spain. At the end of his struggle, the Jesuits and the Viceroy managed to get Palafox reassigned to a remote diocese in Spain. However, before his departure, Palafox issued the completion of the cathedral, and on April 18th, 1649 consecrated the church in the name of the Immaculate Conception. Construction continued after the cathedral's consecration and was not finished until 1690 when the front facade was added.

The Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary is a Catholic teaching that deals with how Mary was born without sin. The teaching says that in order for Mary to be fit enough to bear the son of God, she needed to be without sin completely, including original sin that was passed down from Adam and Eve through regular conception. According to Catholic teaching, Mary was conceived within her mother Saint Anne the same way that Jesus was conceived within Mary. Interestingly, though the church was dedicated to the Immaculate conception, the main dome has a painting depicting the Assumption of Mary. Today, the teaching of the immaculate conception is not officially supported by the Catholic Church.

The Assumption of Mary is a Catholic teaching describing the end of the Virgin Mary's life. The story says that at the end of the her life, the Virgin Mary was assumed into heaven wholly as body and soul rather than dying and only her soul going to heaven. This is important to the Catholic Church because according to the church the soul of every person who accepts God goes to heaven but not their bodies. The story was not recognized as religious dogma until 1950 but was taught in some parishes as far back as the 4th century. Today it is taught by Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodox churches.

The city of Puebla was founded in 1531 as a planned city, meaning when The Zocalo of Puebla was the built as the first block the rest of the city was constructed around it in a grid pattern. Typical of Mexican plazas, it is surrounded on its sides by the Government Palace, the cathedral, and several other governmental and commercial buildings. The Zocalo was the primary marketplace for the city at its founding and was also the center of amusement for the people, a source of water through its fountain, and the place where executions were carried out. Over time the city became a stopping point between the port city of Vera Cruz and the capital of Mexico City. Eventually the city grew as an industrialization center.

For more (including 6 images) view the original article

In the summer of 1989, the residents of a Yucatán village near the ancient ruins of Yaxuná were in great distress. Due to a drought, two of that year’s crop plantings had failed and a third crop failure would spell disaster for the villagers. Unwilling to leave the third crop’s success to mere chance, the inhabitants resorted to an ancient custom that their ancestors had used for more than one thousand years. [1]

Under the guidance of a local shaman, the residents built an altar of gourds, saplings, and corn to summon the ancient Mayan god of rain and thunder, Chac. For three days, the shaman burned incense and made offerings of honey wine, meat, and cornbread before falling into a trance for ten hours. [2]

David Freidel, an archeologist who then worked for Southern Methodist University and a participant in the ceremony, recalled what occurred next.

“When the ceremony ended, we heard the deep rumble of thunder.” [3]

Despite repeated attempts by Spanish colonial authorities to eradicate the ancient gods of the Yucatán, the ch’achac or “summoning the Chacs” ceremony is an ancient religious tradition that the modern residents of the Yucatán peninsula continue to practice today. The ceremony pays homage to Chac, the ancient deity responsible for rain and the most prayed to pagan entity on the Yucatán. [4] The region’s unique geography played a key role in shaping the special relationship between the Indians and Chac.

The Yucatan peninsula is a vast limestone shelf devoid of readily accessible sources of fresh water such as rivers and streams. [5] In Pre-Columbian times, Indian farmers had no livestock with which to supplement their diets. The survival of a village wholly depended on the successful harvest of their crops and the timely arrival of rain. In times of drought, all the men of a village would gather to perform the ch’achac ceremony in the hope that the rains would return to water their crops and replenish the cenotes. Cenotes are large sinkholes that provide easy access to an immense network of underground pools of fresh water throughout the Yucatán region.

With rain and water playing such a crucial role for the survival of the Indians, Chac figured prominently in the daily lives of the peasants working the fields. In his analysis of the Dresden Codex, one of the four Mayan codices that survives today, historian Paul Schellhas noted that Chac was invoked 141 times, more than the mentions of all the other Mayan deities combined.

Historian J. Eric S. Thompson notes how Chac was not single deity but a group of deities that served a variety of functions related to rain and the natural phenomena associated with it. The four main Chacs resided at the “foot of the sky” and were responsible for rain, thunder, and lightning. Lesser Chacs such as Ah Ch’alelem Caan Chac or “He with the Jar Sky-chac” were responsible for replenishing the water in the cenotes. Thompson asserts the Indians believed these lesser Chacs resided in caves and cenotes found throughout the Yucatán and were the most accessible of the Chacs. [8]

The Yucatec natives viewed cenotes as “gifts from the gods” and began to hold religious ceremonies at the cenotes, especially at those located at Tabi, Tibolón, Sotuta, Kanchunnup and Yaxcabá. The most sacred of the cenotes was located at Chichen Itza. [9] The Maya believed that their sacrificial victims, who were thrown in the cenotes, would interact with the Chac deities beneath the surface of the water. [10] Historians believe the ceremonies and rituals performed at cenotes were primarily for the purpose of petitioning for rain. [11]

Chac’s uncontested rule over the Indians ended abruptly in 1545 when the first Spanish missionaries set foot on the Yucatan peninsula. Initially, the natives and the Franciscans preachers established an uneasy peace as evidenced by the Indians showing the Franciscans their sacred codices. That trust however ruptured in the summer of 1562. Two villagers reported finding bones and skulls in a cave near Mani prompting church officials to launch a brutal inquisition. [12] More than 4,500 natives endured weeks of torture meted out by the Spanish clerics. For another seventeen years, the Franciscans continued their extralegal inquisition without consulting secular authorities. [13]

The zealousness of the Franciscan missionaries however laid the foundation for the Indians to continue the practice of their ancient religion. The Franciscan goal of eradicating idolatry using harsh methods caused widespread unrest in the province leading to several rebellions. This drew the ire of secular authorities who wanted to pacify the province to maximize the profits earned from the land for themselves and the Spanish crown.

In the ensuing tug-of-war for control between church and state, the Indians themselves noted the divisions between their conquerors and moved quickly to take advantage of the situation.[14] When church officials handed down cruel punishments for idolatry, the Indians complained to the secular authorities. When the secular authorities tried to enslave them, the Indians sought the protection of church officials. Historian John Chuchiak notes this careful “balance act” as the key to the survival of traditional Yucatec culture and religion. [15]

“By playing a delicate balance act between a full-scale revolt against secular authorities and total submission to religious authorities, the Maya preserved their unique culture and civilization against all odds.” [16]

Today the practice of “summoning the Chacs” continues with some changes. Human sacrifices no longer occur, and rituals no longer happen at cenotes but in times of drought, Yucatec villagers continue to reach out to their ancient gods. Although the specifics of the ceremony vary according to each village, the modern ch’achac ritual typically consists of a three-day ceremony in which all the men of a village gather to make offerings to Chac.

Pascale Meehan, a historian from the University of Colorado, witnessed the Chac summoning ceremony in August 2011 near Yaxaba, Yucatán. On the first day of the ceremony, she said the villagers gathered at a location in the forest near the village and built a four-post altar made of leafy branches and saplings. Using vines from the forest, the altar’s four posts were “anchored” to nearby trees. A recently hunted deer was butchered and the meat was used to make a stew while the animal’s blood was set aside. The blood was then mixed with ba’alché, a tea made from tree bark, to make a ritual beverage which is considered the favorite drink of Chac. [17]

Over the next two days, the shaman makes offerings of corn bread, honey wine, and stewed meats. On the third day, the shaman consumes of a special alcoholic beverage which causes him to enter an altered state of being during which he consults with the gods. Afterward, the shaman leads a set of final prayers in the hope the ceremony has appeased Chac and the rain will return. [18]

Although the modern-day Yucatec villagers consider themselves good Roman Catholics, Chac and the ch’achac ceremony remain a crucial part of their daily lives. [19] The ceremony has changed since the arrival of the Spanish in the sixteenth century. The people of the Yucatán remain as they were then, an agriculture-based society. When in dire need due to a lack of rain, they still turn their ancestral gods in times of distress and despite all odds, continue to keep their culture and religious traditions alive well into the twenty-first century.

For more (including 5 images) view the original article