Talk:Tejano
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Texas, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Texas. |
from what i've heard the word "tejano" means "texan", and the word "tejas" means "texas".
but then i'm no where near fluent in spanish... yet.
Gringo300 3 July 2005 05:45 (UTC)
- Yes, you are correct. It would have been spelled "texano" in earlier forms of Spanish before modern spelling reforms. The letter X in archaic Spanish used to be pronounced as a voiceless postalveolar fricative; now it is a voiceless velar fricative or a voiceless glottal fricative and spelled J – though certain Mexican place names, e.g. México, retain the archaic spelling. Don't get too confused about the word "tejas", though, because it also means "tiles" and is also a type of noodle. – Andyluciano 19:08, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Large revert to April 29th 2006 version
I just made a huge revert. Firstly because the article was rewritten by an anonymous IP editor who failed to cite any of the assertions (and removed important navigation features like the disambiguation toplinks). The second reason is that a user who has been working on the unverified Tejano (dialect) article had seen fit to copy-paste that into the article. So, I reverted to the last good version before those changes.
The article written by the anon may have good information, but without citation it's useless in the page. If anyone wants to track down sources and re-add bits to the article, the previous contents are here:
- Much confusion exists regarding the identity of those who are called "Tejanos". A Tejano today is classified as a "Mexican Texan" or a "Texan of Mexican heritage". While this classification would correctly identify the "new Tejanos"; those people from Texas whose ancestors came from Mexico beginning in the period of time just before, during and after the Mexican Revolution of 1910 through today, it is a misnomer when applied to the people who were in Texas beginning in the Spanish Colonial Period before the first Anglo-Americans came to Texas and through the Texas Revolution. Immigration from Mexico to the U.S. in the period after the Mexican War and before the Mexican Revolution of 1910 was almost non-existent and statistically insignificant.
- To this effect, it is incorrect to assert that Texas during the Spanish Colonial Period was a part of Mexico which was under Spanish rule. Mexico as a modern nation did not exist but until 1821, before this time Texas was a part of Spain, a province of New Spain, and the people born in Texas were citizens of the Kingdom of Spain, not of Mexico, since the country of Mexico did not yet exist. While the flag of Spain governed Texas for 308 years (from 1513 through 1821), and for a period of 301 years (from 1520 through 1821) the flag of Spain waved over Texas uninterrupted, the flag of Mexico waved in Texas for only 14 years. This period of Mexican jurisdiction over the people of Texas, from 1821-1835, was a period of an imposed Mexican rule which the colonial Texans never wanted, imposed by the historical circumstance of having been dropped in the lap of Mexico by Spain when Mexico earned its independence from Spain. The colonial Tejanos had never wanted Mexican rule, having had established an independent republic in 1813 which looked forward to becoming part of the United States. Because Mexican rule was imposed upon the colonial Tejanos and they never wanted it, from their perspective the period of Mexican jurisdiction would be correctly identified as the period of Mexican occupation.
- It is necessary, therefore, to distinguish between the "new Tejanos", those people from Texas whose ancestors came from Mexico beginning in the period of time just before, during and after the Mexican Revolution of 1910 through today, and the "colonial Tejanos" or "Tejano Texians", that is, those people who were the original pioneers of Texas who tamed the wilderness of Texas starting in the Spanish Colonial Period and up through the Texas Revolution, and to define the colonial people of Texas in a more historically accurate way that would reflect their family histories and traditions and their self identification and the history and historical data that supports them.
- It is necessary to draw this distinction because the people who came from Mexico starting just before,during and after the Mexican Revolution through today are and were of a different ethnic heritage than the ones who colonized Texas during the Spanish Colonial Period, of a different history. While the majority, not all, of the people who have come from Mexico since the Mexican Revolution are and drew their identity from the mestizos (people of mixed Indian and Spaniard blood) or genizaros (Indians who lost their tribal identity and adopted Spanish names and the Spanish language, of which much of the modern day Mexican immigrant population in the U.S. consists) and had their history and identity in the history of Mexico, the majority, not all, of the people who colonized Texas in the Spanish Colonial Period were and drew their identity from the Spaniards and the criollos (full blooded Spaniards born in the New World), and had their history and identity in the history of Spain and of the United States as a consequence of the participation of Spain and its colonial provinces of Texas and Louisiana in the American Revolution. This difference caused the people of Texas, the colonial Tejanos or Tejano Texians, to identify more with the people of Louisiana, which was a Spanish colony, and of the U.S., rather than with the people of Mexico. For this reason as early as 1813 the colonial Tejanos established a government in Texas that looked forward to becoming part of the United States. As revealed by the writings of colonial Tejano Texians such as Antonio Menchaca, the Texas Revolution was first and foremost a colonial Tejano cause, the Anglo Americans simply joined the colonial Tejanos in that cause, having been invited and recruited to do so by the colonial Tejanos, the Tejano Texians.
- In summary, while a new Tejano is a Mexican American, Latino or Chicano generally of Indian or mixed Spanish and Indian heritage, a colonial Tejano, who can also be correctly identified as a Tejano Texian, is a descendant of those colonists who pioneered Texas as citizens of the Kingdom of Spain through the Spanish Colonial Period starting in the 1500's through the 1800's up to the Texas Revolution and who were generally of pure Spaniard blood, or hispanicized European heritage, including Frenchmen like Juan Seguin, Italian like Jose Cassiano, or Corsican like Antonio Navarro, generally of white Mediterranean race, although there was also a small number of people of mixed blood among them ranging from mulattos to mestizos who were excluded by the Spanish law of "limpieza de sangre", purity of blood, from participating in the colonization of Northern New Spain including Texas and the American Southwest. For these reasons a colonial Tejano, or Tejano Texian, is more accurately classified as a "Spaniard Texan" or "Spaniard Texian" or "Spaniard American" or as a "Texan of Spaniard heritage", as opposed to a "new Tejano" who is of Mexican heritage.
- In direct relation to this distinction, genuinely Tejano music is related and sounds more like the folk music of Louisiana known as "Cajun" music and to the music of northern Mexico, rather than to the folk music of central and southern Mexico such as Mariachi and other Latino music. With the abundant use of the accordion, genuinely Tejano music is part of the foundation of Country Western music. The American Cowboy culture and music was born from the meeting of the Anglo-American Texians who were colonists from the American South and the original Tejano Texian pioneers and their "vaquero" or "cow man" culture.
- It should be noted as well that in the Spanish language, the term "tejano" is simply the term to identify an individual from Texas regardless of race or ethnic background.
- For a more thorough history of the colonial Tejanos,or Tejano Texians, including their participation in the American Revolution and the Texas Revolution click on the following Texas A&M University link: http://www.tamu.edu/ccbn/dewitt/images/texforum/txforumloya.htm
— Saxifrage ✎ 22:36, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
- It seems Alex Loya has created a content fork using this text at Tejano Texian. — Saxifrage ✎ 07:27, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I took a closer look at the material at Tejano Texian and I only just noticed (stupid me) that it's not mere a cut-n-paste of this material, but it also has decent references. Thus, I've proposed that it be merged into this article. The testimony of the uninvolved editor below seems to indicate that this material is more accurate than the current article. (Note, I've no familiarity with this subject at all, so I can't judge. The sources look good though.) — Saxifrage ✎ 05:52, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] Soy Tejano
I'd like to clarify that Tejanos are not necessarily people of Mexican descent. Many Tejanos are descendents of Spaniards who came directly to the territory which is now Texas and never migrated to the territory which is now Mexico. This is the major distinction between Mexican-Americans and Tejanos. Yes, somwhere in between then and now the territory became Mexican territory, but this does not cause Tejanos to be of Mexican descent. Many of us never crossed the border, the border crossed us. As a consequence, we have formed our own unique and distinct Latino culture that can not be simplified or lumped together with that of others. We love and respect our friends and neighbors, los mexicanos, and in some ways our experiences may be similar. However, in many other ways they are staunchly different. I would definitely be willing to accept Mexican-Americans living in Texas as Tejanos, however, to limit and simplify an entire cultural identity to just this is mildly offensive.
129.170.202.3 04:34, 27 May 2006 (UTC) Lena
If you can dig up some references that can support this stuff, please do bring them here and we can see what they can add to the article.— Saxifrage ✎ 05:44, 27 May 2006 (UTC)- Stike that, it looks like we've got some good references already. — Saxifrage ✎
05:55, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you!!! I completely agree! Because if the definition does not include those who were here during the Spanish occupation, then where does that leave us? We were the ones who molded the culture, logically speaking. Many of the original families ended up marrying into other families that were here (indigenous) or that came later. Sgarza 17:40, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Hello,
I am Alex Loya, and I am the person who wrote Tejano Texian. I am sorry about having replaced the original Tejano article, but it is true as Saxifrage says and Soy Tejano testifies that Tejano Texian is a more accurate definition of what a Tejano is, and I just didn't understand how Wikipedia works, I apologize. Because Tejano Texian is more accurate than Tejano I am sorry to see that the link from Tejano to Tejano Texian was removed, it really should be there. I have added some of the references I used in my research to the article. I had thought I created an account here, but, as I said, I just don't fully understand the workings of Wikipedia, so if one of you editors could help me get Tejano Texian fully into Wikipedia, that would be great, there really needs to be a counterbalancing view of what a Tejano is because the prevailing view is, as Soy Tejano says, mildly offensive and also inaccurate. Merging sounds like the right thing to do, so, whoever does the merging should.
[edit] Groups
It seems that there are perhaps three groups involved here:
1.) Spanish colonials who might not have been "Mexican" (this whole “debate” reminds me of Rudy Acuna's concern that some Latinos are "anything but Mexican" out of internal race awareness, or worse: racism). However, since these immigrants came from North African colonies, they may have been of mixed African-Spanish-Arab blood. This population was small and was closely tied to larger settlements south of the present day US-Mexico border.
This region was managed by authorities in Mexico City, Nueva España, of which Tejas was a province, so Texas might not have been part of a "Mexican" nation, but it was managed and organized by Spanish authorities in Mexico City, many of whom were born in Mexico City, then the primary bureaucratic center of New Spain, rather than "Spain." It was a colonial culture, so to say this was "Spain" is not correct.
India, Canada, and South Africa, for example (despite colonial propaganda), were not "Britian," or "England," but they were British Colonies.
2.) Mexican colonials who were "Mexican" but might have had stronger regional identities tied to Coahuila y Tejas. These were mostly mestizos but as scholars have documented some “became Spanish” over time as they became more prosperous. This population was small as well, but took on a stronger regional identity in Tejas, and like Anglo-American immigrants, in many cases, rejected the authority of “Mexico” in Texas.
3.) Mexican immigrants who came 1890-1930 were mestizos, more "Mexican" than these early colonials were, yet might have been regional in identity orientation. Some perhaps had stronger ties to villages and colonial haciendas near Torreon, Saltillo, Coahuila, and Monterrey for example. These immigrants came to be the largest population group in South Texas after 1930, and are commonly considered and consider themselves “Tejanos”. These Tejanos are those who write, sing, and record “Tejano” music. These Texans are today’s Tejanos or Texas-Mexicans (Tex-Mex) and see themselves as such, since they have been Texans for 70-120 years, and many intermarried with some of the earlier colonial settlers along the border.
Much of the music, and the folkways and language considered “Tejano” are a result of the mixture of all three influences on the food, music, and folklore of the region. There have always been tensions between these groups, but the entry needs to cover all three immigrant and settlement waves. The entry should not try to favor the "European" migrants over the mestizo. The meaning of the term has evolved and the entry needs to reflect these changes rather than a hard racial line.
--Msrodrig 13:06, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
________________________________________________________________________________________________
1. "These immigrants came from North African colonies"... false. The vast majority of colonists of Northern New Spain came from mainland Spain or were the criollo children of families from mainland Spain and some from the Canary Islands. The Juan de Onate expedition included Spaniards from New Spain, criollos, Spain, the Canary Islands, the Balearic Islands, Greece, Italy, Portugal and one man from Flanders. Of the approximately 600 colonists, less than 90 were mestizos, for example.
"(this whole “debate” reminds me of Rudy Acuna's concern that some Latinos are "anything but Mexican" out of internal race awareness, or worse: racism)" To deny the descendants of colonial Tejano Texians their Spaniard heritage is the true racism, especially when their ancestors were so careful to preserve it every chance they had, showing that it was important to them. To insist upon the Spaniards being mixed African-Spaniard-Arab is just a way to keep robbing the original Tejano Texians of their heritage.
Of course, New Spain was no more Spain than New England was England, obviously. But the land belonged to Spain at that time as New England belonged to England. And in Northern New Spain, as opposed to India, and is in Canada the population was either British or French, so in Northern New Spain the population was generally Spaniard, so they understood themselves to be and so they called themselves in conversation and so they identified themselves.
2. " Mexican colonials who were "Mexican" but might have had stronger regional identities tied to Coahuila y Tejas. These were mostly mestizos but as scholars have documented some “became Spanish” over time as they became more prosperous."
This anti-Spaniard bigotry in favor of Mexican “mestizoness” among some historians who have had a strong influence in people’s understanding of the colonial population of what would be Texas and the American Southwest can be clearly observed, it can be easily pointed out in the way they repeat the myth that the colonial population “whitened” itself. Invariably, some writers stress as though it were a fact, which it is not, that as time went by and people became more financially affluent, they would “whiten” themselves in the way they were listed in the census. Invariably, the case of one individual, Antonio Salazar, a colonist of San Antonio who was from Zacatecas, is used as an example. In four different documents dated between 1789 to 1784 he is listed in incremental levels of “whiteness”, being listed in the earliest documents as “Indian”, and then as “mestizo” and finally as “Spaniard”. Based on this one example, and several writers use this same example, they conclude that the people “whitened” themselves in the census; they were really mestizos but, so these writers erroneously assert, they said they were Spaniards (David Weber, The Spanish Frontier in North America, p.324). This man, Antonio Salazar, is touted and showcased to, again, promote the myth that the Spaniards of Northern New Spain were really mestizos… yet nothing is ever, and I do mean EVER said about a man by the name of Perez Nieto from Sinaloa who in the May 20, 1782 garrison list of San Diego, California is listed as a Spaniard, but eight years later in the San Diego Census of 1790 he is listed as a mulatto, in fact experiencing a “darkening” of his race, exactly the opposite of what some writers claimed happened. Or nothing is EVER said about Francisco Serrano, who in the 1782 garrison list and the 1790 Census of San Diego, in one he is listed as a mestizo and in the other he is listed as a European, while in both he is identified as having been born in Sastago, Aragon in Spain (not in North Africa). In other words, it is agreed in both listings that Francisco Serrano was a Peninsular Spaniard, yet in one he is identified as a mestizo, experiencing a “darkening” of his race in contradiction to what some influential writers argue using the example of Antonio Salazar. You see, it could just as easily be argued that the opposite of what the writers claim happened, maybe they were actually all Spaniards and people have made them mestizos over time, which claim would actually reflect more the reality of what has actually happened. Yet, Francisco Serrano and Perez Nieto are both completely ignored while Antonio Salazar is showcased! It is evident that these writers are affected to the point of manipulating the truth by their own bias. So what is it then, if some individuals’ race changes from census to census? Well, one thing is certain, the fact that in a few cases some individuals’ race changed from census to census, and only the ones in which the race becomes whiter are mentioned while the ones where the race becomes darker are ignored, one thing is certain: that occasional circumstance should not be used to cast shadows on the “Spaniardness” of the colonial settlers of Northern New Spain. Those are isolated instances and should not be used to draw conclusions about the whole. Rather, the written testimony of who they were should be taken at face value, and that testimony says that the overwhelming majority of the colonial settlers of Northern New Spain including Texas and the American Southwest were Spaniards. Hey, Francisco Serrano was Peninsular!
3. The fact is that in Northern New Spain, including Texas and the American Southwest and the northern states of Mexico, as Professor Robert McCaa, Ph.D., of the University of Minnesota, historian and ethnographer expert in Mexico who has written numerous articles about the subject, writes, “The Indian base was never as dense as in the South (of Mexico) and in the North many Indian groups were annihilated by wars over the centuries... the white population did not intermarry very much (as I have shown in a couple of publications and as one can still see today in Parral)... Racial terms are rarely used, but the markers are readily understood and respected when it comes to selecting marriage partners” (Dr. Robert McCaa in a personal email to me dated November 16, 2003).
Mestizos in Northern New Spain were a very small minority,in fact,the mixed population of Northern New Spain was mulatto and not mestizo, making its population completely different from the population of Central and Southern Mexico, which was one very strong reason why not only the Tejano Texians but also the colonials of northern Mexico in colonial days, as criollos that they generally were, either fell on the side of Spain, or, as in Texas, attempted to even then establish an independent republic with view of becoming part of the United States. This is, in great part, why not only the Tejano Texians sought their independence from Mexico and to be included in the United States, but also the people of Chihuahua, Coahuila, Nuevo Leon, New Mexico and other northern provinces attempted to be independent from Mexico and establish an independent Republic of the Rio Grande (the fact that during the colonial struggle they declared themselves for the King of Spain, in northern Mexico, as well as the fact that they called their republic Republic of the Rio Grande and not Republic of the Rio Bravo, as the Mexicans called the Rio Grande, shows that their struggle went beyond a political struggle of centralism versus republicanism and it was an issue of identity for them, a distinct identity)
To deny the Tejano Texians their heritage in favor of newer immigrants is unfair and is truly racist,it is a terrible injustice and a cultural, not literal, genocide of the colonial people of Texas (and the American Southwest), for this reason the entry should distinguish between the new Tejanos and the Colonial Tejano Texians whose identity needs to be asserted and preserved.
[edit] Agree or disagree with merge?
This is a section for simply saying whether you agree or disagree with merging "Tejano Texian" into the "Tejano" article; please give no more than a sentence or so of elaboration, as we already have threads discussing the issue in great detail. Lawikitejana 19:22, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
- Agree. It will take careful editing to make sure none of the good material is lost, but I don't think people are going to look up the "T.T." article, and the "Tejano" article will be greatly enriched and improved by judiciously edited addition of the other article (you can see its author already agreed to the merge concept).Lawikitejana 19:22, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
- Agree, though the work involved will be considerable. — Saxifrage ✎ 18:25, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- Agree, I believe that the Tejano article is easier to search and that if these two articles were merged more information would be able for the common reseacher.Bennyj600 02:43, 8 November 2006 (UTC)bennyj600
[edit] Most of this is historic but the word is now used in a broader sense.
The Texas State Historical Association
Basically, people that are of Hispanic descent but want to be labeled as Texans call themselves Tejanos. It's more for the affection of Texas than where your ancestors came from.
