Much of the so-called Age of Santa Anna in the history of independent Mexico remains a mystery and no decade is less well understood than the years from 1835 to 1846. In 1834, the ruling elite of middle class hombres de bien concluded that a highly centralised republican government was the only solution to the turmoil and factionalism that had characterised the new nation since its emancipation from Spain in 1821. The central republic was thus set up in 1835, but once again civil strife, economic stagnation, and military coups prevailed until 1846, when a disastrous war with the United States began in which Mexico was to lose half of its national territory. This study explains the course of events and analyses why centralism failed, the issues and personalities involved, and the underlying pressures of economic and social change.

The decades that followed independence from Spain in 1821 transformed Mexico from a strong, stable colony to a republic suffering from economic decline, political turmoil, regional divisions and class hatred. This chaotic state hindered efforts of the young republic to meet the aggressive expansionism of the United States between 1845 and 1848. Pedro Santoni sheds new light on Mexican political history during the conflict - a much neglected subject - through a comprehensive examination of the only Mexican political bloc that wanted war with the United States. Led by Valentin Gomez Farias, this faction was the radical federalists, who in 1846 took the name of puros. Santoni demonstrates the reasons for the failure of the puros' efforts to gain political power and coordinate the war effort. Examining the puros' attempts to reestablish federalism in Mexico, shape public opinion, develop a civic militia and forge alliances with senior army officers and opposing political groups, Santoni maintains that the economic, social and political troubles of Mexico nullified the puros' endeavors to direct armed resistance against the Americans. He also dispels some of the erroneous notions - that the puros and Gomez Farias were self-serving and corrupt and sold out Mexico to the United States, for example - that have been propagated by historians in the past.

"Author Edward L. Miller has delved into previously unused or overlooked papers housed in New Orleans to reconstruct a chain of events that set the Crescent City, in many ways, at the center of the Texian fight for independence. Not only did Now Orleans business interests send money and men to Texas in exchange for promises of land, but they also provided newspaper coverage that set the scene for later American annexation of the young republic."--BOOK JACKET.

The definitive history of the often forgotten U.S.-Mexican War paints an intimate portrait of the major players and their world—from Indian fights and Manifest Destiny, to secret military maneuvers, gunshot wounds, and political spin. “If one can read only a single book about the Mexican-American War, this is the one to read.” —The New York Review of Books Often overlooked, the U.S.-Mexican War featured false starts, atrocities, and daring back-channel negotiations as it divided the nation, paved the way for the Civil War a generation later, and launched the career of Abraham Lincoln. Amy S. Greenberg’s skilled storytelling and rigorous scholarship bring this American war for empire to life with memorable characters, plotlines, and legacies. Along the way it captures a young Lincoln mismatching his clothes, the lasting influence of the Founding Fathers, the birth of the Daughters of the American Revolution, and America’s first national antiwar movement. A key chapter in the creation of the United States, it is the story of a burgeoning nation and an unforgettable conflict that has shaped American history.

The war between the United States and Mexico was decades in the making. Although Texas was an independent republic from 1836 to 1845, Texans retained an affiliation with the United States that virtually assured annexation at some point. Mexico's reluctance to give up Texas put it on a collision course with the United States. The Mexican War receives scant treatment in books. Most historians approach the conflict as if it were a mere prelude to the Civil War. The Mexican cession of 1848, however, rivaled the Louisiana Purchase in importance for the sheer amount of territory acquired by the United States. The dispute over slavery-which had been rendered largely academic by the Missouri Compromise-burst forth anew as Americans now faced the realization that they must make a decision over the institution's future. The political battle over the status of slavery in these new territories was the direct cause of the Crisis of 1850 and ignited sectional differences in the decade that followed. In Crisis in the Southwest: The United States, Mexico, and the Struggle over Texas, Richard Bruce Winders provides a concise, accessible overview of the Mexican War and argues that the Mexican War led directly to the Civil War by creating a political and societal crisis that drove a wedge between the North and the South. While on the surface the enemy was Mexico, in reality Americans were at odds with one another over the future of the nation, as the issue of annexation threatened to upset the balance between free and slave states. Winders also explains the military connections between the Mexican War and Civil War, since virtually every important commander in the Civil War-including Lee, Stonewall Jackson, Grant, McClellan, and Longstreet-gained his introduction to combat in Mexico. These connections are enormously significant to the way in which these generals waged war, since it was in the Mexican War that they learned their trade. Crisis in the Southwest provides readers with a clear understandin

"One need not be schooled in military history or archaeology to benefit from this research, for the authors do an excellent job of maintaining the interest of [both] the scholarly reader and anyone new to these subjects."--Journal of the West

The countries of Latin America have suffered through numerous foreign interventions and domestic wars in the nearly two centuries that have followed its independence. These conflicts have also given rise to mass mobilizations of middle-class professionals, women, peasants, urban workers, and Indians, who sought to carve out a more active public role in the new states that emerged from these struggles. In some cases, elites and their military allies violently repressed the newly emerging forces. Recent research has begun to place greater emphasis on the lives of common people and the interventions they had on the larger events of the day. Eight chapters written by different scholars show the the importance of the actions of civilians in wars in Latin America. Chapters describing civilians' roles and lives through wars in Latin America are supplemented by recommended print and online resources for further study, a glossary defining important terms and concepts, and a timeline putting events into a chronological context.

"This book explores the ways in which people in Latin America and the Caribbean joined with others in Europe and the United States to re-imagine the ancient term "democracy", so as to give it relevance and power in the modern world. In all these regions, that process largely followed the French Revolution; in Latin America it more especially followed independence movements of the 1810s and 20s. The book looks at how a variety of political actors and commentators used the term to characterize or argue about modern conditions through the ensuing half-century; by 1870, it was firmly established in mainstream political lexicons throughout the region. Following introductory scene-setting and overview chapters, specialists contribute wide-ranging accounts of aspects of the context in which the word was "re-imagined"; six final chapters explore differences in its fortune from place to place"--

This is a wide-ranging and comprehensive survey of warfare from the outbreak of the American War of Independence to the British conquest of Egypt. Drawing on both primary and secondary sources this book offers an unrivalled account of civil and international conflicts involving Western powers, integrating both naval and land warfare. This book covers military capability as well as conflict, social and political contexts as well as weaponry, tactics and strategy. As well as examining such major conflicts as the Napoleonic Wars, the Crimean War, the American Civil War and the Wars of German Unification, this book redresses the imbalance of previous treatments by examining other important conflicts, for example, those in Latin America, as well as insurgency and counter-insurgency in Europe. This book's global perspective provides for a more reliable assessment of what constitutes military capability. In so doing, the author challenges the technological determinism and linear conceptions of developments in military science that continue to characterise much of military history. Instead the author reveals a much more complex dynamic, indeed going so far as to question the idea of 'modernity' itself. Bold in scope, and cutting-edge in its interpretations, this book offers much for the student, general reader and professional historian alike.

A fascinating new history of Texas that emphasizes the importance of Mexico's political culture in attracting US settlers and Texas's unique role in the nation-building efforts of both Mexico and the United States. Why did tens of thousands of Anglo settlers renounce their US citizenship and declare their loyalty to another country by migrating to the Mexican Republic of Texas between 1821 and 1836? In One National Family, Sarah K. M. Rodríguez challenges traditional assumptions about early North American history to draw new conclusions about the comparative power, viability, and nation-building of Mexico and the United States. Drawing from archival research in both countries, Rodríguez highlights a profound political irony at the core of US expansion—that it was spurred by US weakness and Mexican viability. Rodríguez argues that Mexican federalism, long blamed for the country's disintegration and instability, was precisely what attracted thousands of US immigrants to Mexican Texas. Mexico's comparatively weak fiscal structure, ample land, and commitment to dual sovereignty made it an appealing alternative to the thousands of US agrarians who were disillusioned with the United States' political and economic centralization. Yet if Mexico's political system was its strength in the 1820s, it would be the source of conflict and secession by the 1830s. Both Mexico and the United States confronted the limitations of federalism in their respective journeys from loosely confederated republics to consolidated, modern nation-states. But precisely because of its traumatic territorial losses in the mid-nineteenth century, Mexico embraced the characteristics of modern liberal democracy—majoritarianism, territorial sovereignty, and racial equality—far sooner than the United States did. Published in cooperation with the William P. Clements Center for Southwest Studies, Southern Methodist University.