as i am listening to you today i keep getting in my mind that old bumper stickeb, just because you are paranoid does not mean they are not out to get you. i remember back in the '70s i guess it was, that when people, friends of mine on the left would say that, it turned out that they were right. the fbi was trying to systematically arrested, systematically harassing dr. martin luther king jr. so given the things we just talked about how is the person, an average persono make the distinction? how arwe supposed to know? is the government really out to get us? are theyeally treating conspiracies or is thisust another, you know another wrong explanation? ..

from one that is imagined or maybe there is no way to do that exit of th investigation. >> guest: i mean what was watergate? there s a coniracy among the "washington post" involved in this conspiracy and then they proved it was a real conspiracy,

iran contra, until the evidence comes u real conspiracy. other conspiracies, you know, we don't have the evidence yet. that doesn't mean all ways they didn't happen but it doesn't mean we need to dend delete could demand the evidence. >> host: thank you very much. it's been wonderful. >> guest: thank you. to present their reasons for engaging in the confrontation. he also profiles key participants including arican president william polk and antonio lopez de santa anna. the public library and the mexico hosts this evt. it's about one hour and 20 nutes. >> i would like to thank barbara

for the introduction and friends ford of arranging this at the brary for their hospitaty and for being here. c-span2 book tv. if you haven't sampled it, you have really missed something every weekend. and just keep in mind that when this airs millions of people will be watching as a watch where you scratch. [lghter] i use the words trouble bause i take a kind of expanded view of what is a war. ually, the fact that the shooting from 1846 to 1848, most historians will say that's it. but these tngs don't come out of nowhere

the origins of that war go back before the third country existed. and we ill feel the effects today. there is still a struggle. it isn now witarmies and guns, but there is still an inherent sense of struggle between these two should be sister republics. i have done my best to cover both sides of equally using our original material from both sides. this is also a mexican historian stock but the mexicans and usualy the army and the united states historians talk about the u.s. side both of them a leave out though major actors in this who had a major role to play and hothe war got started andow

it wked out in the end. that's the people who really owned the land these two nations were fighting over. the bar american indians. over a century before the 1840's the frontier settlement in northern mexico had been retreating into retreating under pressure. military pressure from comanche's eecially. leaving isolated outposts in texas and mexico anyone who lost since the identification with mexico city. and in fact during the rellion of the 1830's all of them rebuild a declared independence. california and new mexico down to california got away with it. keep that geography in mind, and the people who really made the

difference. they were here either before the spanish or the english. i tal about what i will dis rad a little, talk a little, read a little and then leave time for questions. so, i will open wi a prologue. the last of the mexican and batres entered the valley in the 14th century farrom their homeland the place of cranes. they had been marched off by the teach god, the hummingbird wilshire. they were a dirty, savage, bloodthirsty people with a bad habit of stealing away and and sacrificing humans wholesale. the introduced into the volley in the weapon, the bow and arrow. as all eyes on the battlefield the mexico were in value as neighbors the or frightening, dangerous. they called themselves people of theun.

the eagles ew over them which had taken on additional identity of the dominant spirit that it reasonable other gods in the valley. the old gods remained but more eager grew the mds of men. he told the mexican to look for a leak in the cter would stand and i went and a rock. a top of the cactus the would see a golden eagle marking the spot the would found an empire. they called the island and exceeded over the valley. by the 15th century they held over extending to t ccc and west. early in the 16th centy the face a new tribe of barrians, strangers who came over the seas, and with light skin, harry faces and peculiar quoting.

they did as the mexico have. they wield of new weapons with balls and five-year they invaded the great valley. the newcomers imported the terrible disease which slaughtered people by the millions within a few years the mexican empire was no more. whatemained was villages of farmers tending their lands and common. indio, the new common scold them. they called themselves spaniards. the old mexican empire became spain and the chief memopy of e recent past was the name for the great valley, the valley of mexico. in the center stood mexico city rising from the ruins of mexico. the spaniards expanded their reach south into the generals and more than to the land of desert wild man. in the most barbarous, barbaric indians to the spaniards. the king of spain introduced a new kind of empire, one that tried to dominate the landscape

rather than civilized nations. he did this in competition with kings of france and britain. the three great kings had soldiers, priests and settlers to see how much of america they could claim asserting their power over in those barbara gross who recognized no such authority. so it went until the british and frenchought the great war for employer. the french came and in 17 his american territory were divided between britain and the far north and spain a the west, th land called louisianan. then the british americans rebelled against their king. the idea people could govern themselves without royal supervision sand a shockwave through europe and america. next, france stupak louisianan and sold it to t ankle americans then invade spain. the french came to spain, decided to expand power to america. the glasses of spain did not like that idea, so they took up arms. out of the rebellion was born in the ne country, mexico.

which had a totem of flag bearing a cactus surrounded by evil which now held a stake in its beak. the warrior eagle had returned. meanwhile the anglo-american is crowded against the borders of meco. their totem also was an eagle, american bald eagle. truly it seemed they were shipped this bird. they displayed everywhe even on the buttons and belt buckles on and shoulders that carried flagstaffs with e eagles. this time there wasn't just one eagle in the air, but to come an they were about to raise the struggle for the entire. 600 years to hundred pages, not bad. [laughter] boy, did that take a lot of cutting down in the first draft. i'm sorry it seems i am losing my voice at the outset. i don't know why. and 1848 after the shooting park was over mexican historians said there are two causes of the war between the united states and this country.

one was united states expansionism, aggression, aggressiveness. compounded by mexico's weakness. that is a fair and a description of what went on. the united states was colonized originally into british grade by noonformists and dropouts and troublemakers and, you know, it is hard to get them out of the old country. but they were lazy about governing, so they grew up learning how to govern themselves. they also grew up defining of 40 in 1753, the years been acquired louisiana, the british came to the cocaine issued a order to his colo, an ordinance that rbid them from kurth crossing the appalachian in the in mountains from stlements. well, they said you take it,

king. and americans including george washington, they were willing to fight the natives to get what they wanted and the way of new land. now over the next century, the population of the united states kept growing and growing from a immigration and spread out. and new spain solve this and it scared the daylights out of them and when mexico became in. independence they inherited this year. by the 18 twenties and thirties, this title wave of anglos was washing into texas and more than a landing at the shores of mexico and california. mexico had inherited a weakness about being able to control its northern borders. and remember, before 1719 they

claim to this border we happen to western canada, the oregon country. so much for land claims by empires. seems absurd today, but spa am. there was not enough military power to control this so you had this illegal anglo immigration and the mexic tertories and the 18 twenties, thirties and forties you had mexican politicians raising a ruckus saying this is a pre-lewd to us losing our northern states. it turned out they were right. does it sound familiar? [laughter] we've got ancloteoliticians and the same thing, illegal mexican immigrants coming here to take it back. they mighto that except for texas i suppose. this was the aggressiveness. this wasn't a deliberate policy of the united states government.

it never was. the problem was the united states governent could never ntrol its own citizens. and yet, to this day you will find mexican scholars who believe that, for instance, the texas revolution was a delibera plot enteri out of washington. they completely -- conveently forget that it was one of a series of the federalist state revolutions, mostly in northern and nth-central mico, but also now mexico and california. and especially yucatan, which is always in an uproar, which is caused by santa ana overthrowing the constitution of 1824, abolishing spains, turning them into military departments which the government would select the commanders. so the three armies defeated the

state militia, slaughtered 2000, caured 2,000 then reward his soldiers by telling them to torch the city and then they marched back to mexico city and left a trail of rape and murder and atrocities through every ste they went through. this is why the texans knowing the next target would be than declared independence about the time he got into texas. of course, what happened here, santa ana takes a fedal west rebellion which is one of the common events in mexican history, and turned it into a war of independence, which he then who lost. so the united states government at the time was appalled. andrew jacks, like all presidents before him, tried to get texas without knowing exactly. but the violencand enunciations of the uted

stes officially by the mexican government the he didn know he refused to recognize texas until he was out of office. now, that was the aggressiveness. that was manifest destiny. what about the weakness in mexico? well, in contrast to the united states, which had a colonial experience of self-government and anglo-saxon faith in the rule of law, the spanish colonies were the worst kind of colonialism. centrally controlled, managed out of the home country, not giving a chance to develop a kind of industry or economy, especially after the court instead over in the late 18th century, made it born mexicans,

using pure spanish ancestry denied accesso the highest levels of the army and the government. the economy's of the spanish colonies existed solely to provide profit to the home country. pardon me. well, there was a liberal constitution written in spain after the french conquered in 1812. and before anybody could implement, napoleon and french were kicked out. but in 1820 there was another uproar, and the liberal government came in and wanted to implement the constituon of spain. whthin six years, all of the independence, rebellions, in the spanish colonies in america, some of which started 1810 were

over except puerto rico. spain lost all pitied the spend the next 20 years trying to take back mexico because of the silver min. but the mexicans spanned eight in year war of independence, fighting among themselves because until that constitution was revised in 1820, they didn't want independence. the uppeclasses who had all the power were fighting against rally in -- rebellion from undeeath from those who wanted land and liberty, which later was the battle cry. entel the constitution is going to be imposed, they would he to share power comes within the turned against spain, and they made themselves an empire and then in 1824 the adopted a liberal constitution modeled on the united states.

to summarize the history the, mexico never had governmen they had a speech to the presidency alone changed hands. 50 timesn the 30 years after the adoption of the constitution. but the other constitutions were about what have you. the idea of the rule of law and survivors of the spanish colonialism or so alien as to be unheard of. thunited states, the peaceful transfer of power was instituted by washington and adams and has been respected ever sce. the politicians may want to shoot each other once in awhile but there are limits how far they will go. mexico there's always one general or another shooting his way into power. turns out for the most power when ty got in power they didn't know what they were doing and they were usually too lazy toxercise the power. so thicountry only had nne thing they could all agree on,

the top 2% of people that is, the rest didn't care, and that was they despised the united states. and they were not going to admi the loss of texas. but the war was on necessary. as most of them are. except they were not enough strong voices on either side. once somebody started waving the fls to stop the march into it. so why did it happen? texas already had by 1845 in mexico, california, maybe some of the rio grande states. willsolanier or later, going to have a majority anglo population. it was probably no getting around it. they were going to become part of the united states one way or another. itasn't necessary for the united states government to declare war to make that happen. the reason is due to one man, james k. polk, the president.

a big hit, a paranoid, stubborn man blind of the facts, never really tried to figure out what the other side was. he believed with white persuasion, mexico itself had a nice lot of cash in fact the problems work its debt and claims against it by foreign nationals including the united states so they began to make noise about the claim issue than the rder of texas was on the rio grande. that means santa fwould be a city in texas. this is absurd. it is based on a claim by the texas congress in december, 1836. it had no place in history, whatsoever. and then he started troops marching. each time the mexicans would see the light and put their hand out and deal and take the money.

and moving the army to corpus christi, that didn't do it. so the next spring sant tayler gallen to the disputed territory. that didn't do it. finally there was the skirmish between the mexican-americans which s enoug excuse to declare the american blood had been shed on american soil. and a whole list of all kind of a their grievances which he endangers mexico opped the united states which he didt defend. he wted california into the united states. he was a very nineteenth-century man, and managed to blunder in a war if necessary. the mexicans made a big mistake. they should have fortified [inaudible] polk wouldn't haveeer send an army across a fortified line

into a disputed territory because all the world would know that is just plai aggression. and it was disputed but ownership was a betr case for mexico and texas anyway. but thenly thing mexican politicians and generals to agree on, the mexican army's were fighting each other in the country -- was they would not accept the loss of texas, therefore they gave up the chance and prevent the invasion and second, to have any say when of texas wou be.e the boundary because they said any time the united states troops crossed the river they invaded mexico. this was ten years after mexico had done it. the uned states could never understand this. mexico declared independence from spain and stood by and got

recognized. but it wouldn't recognize one of its own provinces would never accept that. there are still people here who will not accept it. it is more of a way able lee would take something from a kid. mexico and the united states had about the same size territory but there were more americans. the vast majority of the mexican population was literate, had no identification with the nation whatsoever where as the vast majority of the world population of the united states was under it and politically active. you'd think mexico never stood a chance.

but there is mething that neither side ever recognized, never counted on. they knew the generals -- they had more generous than they had regimens. they are so tenacious as revenue source and they were worth buying since you got the special privileges that protected you from the criminal prosecution. who didn't ink of themselves as a mexican? most of whom didn't speak spanish? the in that in the army because they came through their pueblos and home and wives and children then had to follow. to have the sources suppor and at least these soldiers under terrible leadership fought like tigers in every battle they were in. i am going to read the first battle between the two forces and then tell youhis whole

thing. this is an what is now south texas. aside from the skirmish, this is the first main engagement between the two national armies in may, 1846. the patrols reported the movement as soon as the north american -- aft summoning he led his troops out of the camp. tayler scott spotted his army before noon as men were coming up. the yankees stopped at a pond to fill canteens' while the units closed up. the force was deployed east west, facing forth, blging tayler's movement on the road. his calvary was on the move toward the left against expansive across the highway.

paulo balto, tall timber. on the infantry for about a mile his guns dispersed along the line and perished to a 4-pound acre on the far right. he was a regular horseman but beyond that. taylor did with hisrmy faci south across and nearly fl filled broken by small depressions filled from water from the recent rain. the space between the two forces was covered by shoulder high grass which made it difficult for men on foot to move. the sky was clear and bright, the afternoon, hot. tayler put to infantry regiments in front, to others to the right across the road covering the supply trade to his rear, which he never should have brought along. he had calvary along the road and the main line was punctuated with artillery. for the first time said a witness they were to measure eir strength. the army's finished deploying a

route to o'clock ithe afternoon. the had 3300 men under him and estimated tayler had about the same. actually, the anglo strength was around 2200. the mexican general survey of the opposition carefully and noted his bows, quote, were perior and artillery as the head 20 pieces of caliber of 16 and 18 pounds. the battle commenced so hard to fire a cannon did not seize a single moment, he reported afterwards. that was both exaggeration and understand. the mexican artillery was poor quality and low caliber, four and 8-pound. the shot and gpowder substandard the crew is not well trained. taylor had his two big 18 pounder siege guns not very mobile packing al walid, 412 pounders and several six pounders melt on large wheeled carriers known as f artillery. while the mexican waters had only solid shot the ingalls also had cannons and for the 12

pounders exploding shell. the infantry on both sides were armed with smith pour muskett. mostly flat box two or three blocks shots along the musket ball and powder. as always mexicans cartridges were overcharged. troops were sore from vast markets. tayler's meet leisurely strolls. the mexican capri outnumbered the united states but the had been in the fields so they lacked stamina and inadequat eding. the north americans approached with 800 yards and the mexican guns opened fire. too early becse the enemy was out of range. the mexican cannonballs mostly copper incident odierno fell short and ricocheted towards the yankees who jumped aside to let them pass. they did in a taylor put a infantry regimen their planting assault on the mexican left. they thundered through the mesquite thicket only in what

selig driven back by fgllies and square formation. this however checked tayler's click onis right. then the guns opened. concentrating on the infantry on the left. so what shot a canister and exploding shells smashed in on the mexican ranks, tearing into pieces. the enemy th guns of mexican reported damage. shoulders by a lot like victims and combat where they could kill as well as be killed but a fatal situation where they were helpless. some of the officers reiss declined to attack the enemy with a bayonet because they wanted to get in close and sacrifice themselves as a brave man should. that was severely and glorify the terror in the ranks was rl and the soldiers were helpless. a bayonet charge into the country would be suicide so he tried to maneuver his way to victory hehrew his infantry on the right at tayler's left and because the north americans had strength in the right at the

expense of the left the two armies began a slow wheel until they faced each other on a northeast,outhwest texas. the mexican way against the artillery until the grass caught fire in front of the north american right and drove across the grass between the armies, the smoke soense and flea halt that the battle stopped for one hour. the took advantage of the calvary on the left and ed infantry and guns on the center. when the smoke cleared the fire resumed with blood on both sides. the artillery tour bloody holes in the mexican francs that filled him with more bodies. the united states infatry regiments supporting both the 18 pounders now of a road manager samuel flying battery also was appalled by the mexican donner and fell back against order. mexican counter battery fighter killed crinkled and forced his guns back. the ttlefield was choked by staking gunsmoke and blast of

muskett and canons were deafening. the lieutena ulysses s. grant described the gun fair. one cannonball passed through the ranks. it took off the head of an on sted man and under jewel of the captain of my regimen one of the muskett of the killed soldier and his brains and bones knocked down to the others. tayler's attack -- the attack on tayler's left was by the deadly artillery. he ordered another infantry char on the right suppord by the regularalvary. horstman did not join. the charge was poorly planned and foot soldiers were allotted. the infantry broke and ran across the mexican front carrying others in panic leading the army in disorder. it was growing dark, about six in the evening and both sis were exhausted so taylor called a truce. the landscape was a grisly scene, a dead man and animals, shattered equipment, the cannon balls, fire black in the grass. the moans and cries of injured,

the screams of horses and winans filled the air. calls too darfur buzzards bu the coyotes spend the night feasting on the carnage. men prowl on both sides to plunder the dead and bring the wounded. tayler's casualties went by wagon the next morning. theexican injuries were mtly from cann fire sthe men were mutilated rribly, reported a witness. there was nobody to attend to them because the medical officer disappeared and nobody knew where he ft the surcal stores. some men went on supply wagons while others were simply abandoned as the army moved out the next mning it was reported losses of 102 men kled 129 wounded and 26 missing. the other side had about 2 killed and wounded that taylor reported five killed, 48 wounded and two missing. the lopsided butcher's bills reflected the role played by north american country. the day and it got no use arista tried to manage as part of the battle according to the mited abilities.

on the other side of the battle just happened, the chief contribution was to strengthen their right to predict supply trade and he should have left behind. both commanders claim victory and both were wrong. texas hadn't been relieved, the mexican army was still intact and arista had destroyed tayler's or me. the gruesomeusiness would have to be conducted all over again. not much for the glory of war. the worst battles throughout this thing. okay. i talked about the common soldiers. there was something else that happened that produced widespread -- this might ce as a rprise, as it always has come to the politicians and generals of the united states but you know people do not like to be invaded and conquered by the army's? it really annoys them. there were too kd of

resistance. one s a little bit more organized, a this was errilla warfare, which broke out all over. a mexican regular army could not handle the united states army, but boy, they could do a job. the whole of northeast mexico and all of central mexico and the 1947 campaign route from their cues to the mexico city was just under constant. you hear the story that the military genius cut himself off. he didn't do that. the guerrillas did that. and he took a court of his army st to guard the road. he couldn't afford is a they own that road. and they own the road all the way up in the northeast, and the

only thing they could do to keep the splies moving was to put extremely heavy guards on. now, the guerrillas were regulars. they are not cui to take on a large regular force. the small parties, the forgers, john goods, stragglers, they were slaughtered constantly, which is the other element here. within a month after tayler had moved, the volunteer units from the united states showed up. president polk had to fight winfield scott's commanding generals to take the time to train and discipline these people. h been through one big war before in 1812. he proved it was possible to take rall american enlistees and turn them into regular soldiers and813. he knew what he was talking

about. he also knew that an untrained soldiers is a dead soldier in can or bottle, 25,000 dead from disease most volunteers during the war of mexico from d camp sanitation alone illustrates that. poor quantity as fighters and a disgrace to the country. the level of atrocities committed by these volunteers for which it's a great deal of documentation for which tayler and polk and scott both complained about is just unbelievable. this has to be the mt savage army er sent anywhere. this has happened since in other conflicts. it's what happens when you have people with a big army who don't have enough to do. and they just across rebel. the murders, the fever become the gang rapes, arson, desecration of churches on a

daily litany and retaliation. the policy is to say this is criminality. so you get a holster of northeast mexico and miles wide swath up mexico city road by the end of the war smolder and moonscapes. the people will have either been killed off were driven out. so what, we got a great big refugee problem in this war. these people who are aggrieved by these atrocitiestrike back. they are not really guerrillas. individuals or small groups write to the end of the war. and this in tu engendered more formal rebellions against united states occupation. baja california was it was today called an insurgency. joost be caed insurrection.

for two years they were not put up with invasion. the californians who took the mexican army out of the on provinces a couple of years early it took the enforcement to take backontrol from a very small group of people. the states and northeastexico and of course mexico brazillian, get to that. when scott entered mexico city, despite the history of both little and regular opposition, the assumed we go from the mexican army and we on the capitol, right? so they had a big parade and plant in and the city exploded. not because the mexican government wantedt that way, not because en the upper middle class wanted it that way. itas the poorest people of all

clippers would you calloday homeless. mexico city, all big cities had large populations of these people. two of which had been added very bitter and hundred people displaced from the countryside. and they held the scottish army with paving stones and some of them had bricks. the city doctors formed an artillery battery, believe it or not, and scott retaliated by criminality. this is not people fightg for their own the country by threatening to blow up in the house a shot came from and it is then turned to excuse for mass murd and plunder and rape on the part of the volunteers who said there is a nice fancy house over there. then they go in and move it.

so this kind of firepower these people are mostly armed the couldn't stand up, it reduced on the second day and finally mexican independence day, the 16th of september. all that was left now is this local resistance, yankees who got drunk and wandered into the long part of town was a yankee. now we are in the -- now by describing the rebellion. like all other invading generals he said we have come to lerate you from your oppressive master's. most of meco and the -- both mexico and the united states work on distractions.

they felt abandoned by mexo city we back in the colonial period. a very little attachment to it all. and in fact you could still see this today. they did not call themselves mexicans, they called themselves a spanos and if they had any kind of ethnic identity although most of them are in dealers cross t's -- they felt the worst negative. spanish mexico city abandoned a long timeefore. the governor of mexico, nobody can prove it. there is a lot of circumstantial evidence that bought him off with the help of the anglo merchants from this and the trade, and they had an army of well over 2,000 men. all volunteers. many of them couldn't speak spanish. they were gog to make him

fight for mexico but they suddenly decided that discretion is a better part and there is a great big fat guy so he can't get on a horse. he climbed into the dearborn come into the troops he had and then headed for albuquerque. the admirals' assumed then that the mexicans were docild people and they welcome to this invasion. in fact quite the opposite. they resented with anchor and got worse and worse and worse. they had lived a miserable enough life, but it was intolerable under those. what is worse, the tops who parade around santa fe were as bad as any other volunteers.

you have to remember what the problem is with the regiments. the officers are politicians back home and enlisted men are officers back home. what kind of deal to you have in that situation? the second calvary, colonel sterling price was the slithering politician who wanted his men to vote for governor and got and i plead with the early version of the santa fe and made himsela fairly wealthy by the time he was and mexico. whereas the man just turned santa into a cesspool. worrying about this that, in fact i'm exaggerating, three newspapers had correspondents along the rma riding these reports back, and they were scared to death these guys were going to come home as criminals. their bestehavior was bad. so all through the fall, this and post government and these people began to talked.

remember the fluhe spanish invaders and kept them out for 12 years and they remember that. and there was a plot in the december of 1846 that partly by diego, part of the deal promised the governorship of west new mexico and karni never followed through. so he was annoyed. the leaders got away. where am i at? here we go. this brings us to the end of 1846. weigel jonathan was still at a pasco people hibernated when the snow was steep and cold was

arctic, trouble was brewing. the governor believed they had decapitated a threat and result in dember, 1846. the admiral's believed the indios would do what they had always done, what they were told. unfortunately for price, the downtrodden people seized with rentment athe of obnoxious behavior of the occupation troops and the loss of the society they had always known. the hostility boiled over on the rio grande about 70 miles north of santa fe. santa fe had been the spanish and mexican capital but since the early days of the fur trade. nowhere in the territory was contrast between the lives of the rich and poor more evident. enclose lived very well and fine stone or adobe houses while the palin knees lived in shacks.

those that spoke english and became insufferable. the appointed governor lived in a palace and had married into a family. his wife's sister. like cars and he thought he had become a part of mexico. heound out at the end of his life however that to the poor living in nearby pueblo he was just anoer ring. he had come from santa fe john ury 14th, 1847, slogging through the snow. when he reached home with a mob of drongen picks demanded on trumped up charges. he ordered the right to go home and shoved his way through the crowd. after midnight, the mob that continued to grow confronted and again demanded the release of

the prisoners. when he refused they killed m and tore it open and went on a rampage through the streets looking for anglos and their sympathizers to kill. they claimed six victims that morning. led by pueblo the indians and cost us pound of the dora routt 6:00. the death of the native resentment w reflected in the exange between the governor and his killers as recorded by his daughter. they had got out of bed and shot through the door asking what the people wanted. we want your head, a voice answered. they said we've come to tell you. he asked what wrong have i done you? i've always help you. i to argue wheyou are six. he answered yes, but you have to die now so that no north american is going to govern us. in the shooting started. bullets and the door fell in. that took several hours. after he was on the floor

someone decapitated him to read the mog suddenly called down. his blood was satisfied. the women and children trying to dig their way through the back wall but they were set free because they werehe mexicans although they had married and close. that wasn't the end of the uprising the mob recent the rampage through theown. the robbers to the villag and towns including santa fe urging indians and hispano's to kill all incle and mexicans the copper did sith them. it was violence by more savagery. it spread fast. on january 20th and 21st, 12 miles north several hundred pueblos succumb to a farm. to win seven of the defenders. over the mountains he killed seven. another party killed two more. at the same time led by pueblo,

an indian known as thomas. th main bodmarched toward santa fe given by [inaudible] coley for general insurrection to begin the 22nd. the word to the detachments and elsewhere to pose on santa fe on the march north. enclosed it seem they had an idea of the scale of danger. the business partner is the volunteer company of laborers to merchants and mountain men and called them the avengers and offered to join twice. as rebels had known from the beginning it was a race at war. anglos on one side, hispano's and in those of the other. he l three eckert 53 men

including the crew out of santa fe o january 23rd, taking along more companies from missouri voluntred. about 1500 insurgentsssembled on a hilltop near theillage of santa crew. they left behind 36 dead. meanwhile the company of missourians cornered about 150 rebels killing 15 and captured another 15 with a loss of five of the anglo side of the anglos retreated. another detachment took the place an brought down on february 1st. rebels retreating wle cortez vanish into the mountains. rebels believed they had a justice on their side. what they really needed was firepower. they blocked the road and the narrow canyon called january 29. again the anglo drove them off. four days later he entered the

town a marched on. the insurgents opened up the church. they bombaed the place but not heavy enough to penetrate the masonry. he tried again on february 4th. the guns opened fire at mine in the morning. the men ordered to charge the church two hou later. a small part indulged for the rebel fighters to the church, dropped a hole through it,ith the artillery shells and tsed them in sight. another group ran a six counter up and fired through the hole after which the church was taken. many inside the state under the pueblo whilethers took tohe hills while the adventures ran them down and butchered them. the insurgents ended february 50 after losing at least 150 including played low chavez. price had seven killsnd 45 wounded. as he had done in september, price said a court martial. when he was convicted of treason

and hanged on february 7th. omas was shot by a guard while held for trial. other defendants were arrested and confined in santa fe for treason and murder. they were sent free when one of the trials reached washington. they reprimanded price for and the insurgentcouldn be charged with treason because they felt no agents to the united states. they were after all mexican citizens. price declared himself certain the mexicans entertained and ditched the americans and he was about to let another rebellion occur. the colonel of the territory to mo of 1847. when the legislature met for the first time on december she ignored it and by february 1840 abolished most territorial offices and dictatorships. his successors continued to practice until thend of 1850 by the way. there was never again such uprising in mexico. win de resistae went

underground in said. they played territory and quiet sentry reflecting hostility to the occupation leading back to the way below the belly of 1680hile cortez was the only major leader the rebellion to escapes. he organized his men and rated outposts and traffic along the santa fe trail until the end of the war and beyd. but then the band it lived on and cortez in califora. and jesus and many others and mexico and the like united states. and i better stop so you can ask some questions. i went on and realized that i thought. sorry about that. there is a microphone coming around. we've got a question over here.

>> how much time have you spent mexico working on your book? >> i don't know. a lot of it goes back in the time i'd spend their in the past. i was able to use o projects i had done, old notes i had taken on various other things that would help me with -- >> [inaudible] >> i picked up spanishnd ridgely and when you get into this kind of stuff you to be better at it. i guartee it is better than my french in my last book. i started scratch with that and fringe i can handle now as long as iave a dictionary with me but i cannot understand it has spoken. my spanish is getting better

because chicana. she doesn't instruct me or anythi but i c ask her a question and get an answer. anybody else? one over here. >> [inaudible] -- what was it that retreated back? >> it was the rels, the insurgents. they were in those and hispano costas. >>inaudible] >> yeah, and the church that was shot up, the ruins are sti there and ifou look carefully you can see some of the -- ieah,

small bulletoles have rotted away but cannon shots. >>- american leadership in terms of the war and in terms of their ambition and conduct and the war. you sort of h to rank order of the capabilities of polk and taylor and scott, how would you -- would be your response to that? one of the intting political dynamics -- >> my account, except famous names you've heard of on either side come up very well. amazingly. taylor was barely literate and had never handled an obvious --

which at one time. and he really didn't know what he was doing. like i said, all he did at palo alto is when he was encouraging presence. the next day at wasaka -- but they are called gwyneth destin. as taylor refused he figured he had no power but dhe troops from texas and louisiana and arkansas were savages and washington had to cut out. there's one offici count that summarizes the atrocities. it is just unbelievable. which by the way is a memorandum from scott says we need to win the mind and feeling o the

people. does that sou familiar? minds.on of the hearts and that is an old problem. scotwas a good planner and a good your -- theorist sense but a terrible tactician. he calls caused unnecessary bloodshed for no good reason. he caused unnecessary bloodshed among his own troops because after they went charging and he just figured once they come up, send them in. so he sent them into this meat grinder. actuallyomewhere in there he lost over 2,000 men during the august battles and if he kept

that up, he wouldn't have an army left. these by the way were some of the resistance by the mexicans. these were guys that were terrified of the yankees and they had better colonels and generals, buthey -- the general particularly demonstred something the admiral officers should have known. even the greenest kind of militia can do a good job if they are i protected position under good leadership. that was the less than of bunker hill in their own history. ..

dot invade to begin with. i call on the greatest scaliwag in the history of the western hemisphere. he was president of mexico at 11 times, not counting the times she served as either acti or

interim or pamperer president and by the way these were-- that went over their heads. i blame him more than any other individual for mexico's sorry condition as a sham of a nation by the 1840's, becau he was most prominent-- who took over in 1821 and had such a great untry but instead they tried to cut at each other's thrts every chance they got just to get in the place where they could line their pocke and mexicohey called him 15 kus, reaching out like a of the bus grabbing eve bit of treasury he could but he was just an amazingharacter. they would throw him out of the country and then they would

invite him back again until 1857, he was gone for the last time. something happened here too. in the aftermath of throwing h out at the beginning of the war the reform mexico is finally put to death and with that the last vestiges of new spain and mexico becomes mexican and, which it has been ever since. that doesn't mean that it haa first-class government or anything. they are still a cenry and more of a struggle on tt, but you have a better chance of having the people i identify with the country if it is being run by people like themselves and not by people that they still look at as foreigners even if they were born in the country. anybody else? >> having studied this so

intimaly what lesson would you give that we should learn from e history of these two countries struggling and the two cultures as far as communication today? what lesson can we take from this history? one, you cannot escape history. it is there. people in mexico are going to remember all of this much more than the people in this-- because they came out on the losing end. something else i talk about, the hero bandits. what is in the news about the current hartsell? this is a tradition of the kedroe bandits they came over from spain and there arose in spain during the reconquista against the moore's. they are in the drug business now but they are still basically rural bandit gangs. when you have this kind of an

entrenched, ingrained tradition, you don't wipe it out justike that. and it is always going to have a base among the people if the people do not feel that the government really serves their interests, which is the trouble in most latin american countries today. in mexico sll, a very small num@er of people have the greatest share of the gealth. to little goes to improve the lives of the poor classes. it is a lot better than it was evenack in the 1930's, but there is that. second, the united states. you can imagine the impression this war made on all of the western hemisere, all the latin american countries and you add to it the fact that the united states meds t next

century an a half impmenting as policies something that was an informal practice during the end of the war in 1848 and that was all of these agrarian rebellio. this state troops, the united states troops had authority under the treaty do help put that down and said the united states established itself as always being in favor putting down even democratic rebellions in order to preserve order and stability and they, aft the 1900 and the roosevelt corollary that the monroe doctrine and this goes on and on and on. when was the last time we inded a latin american country? then you wonder why a politician can score points with the crowds and south america by claiming--

there's this heritage there that i don't know of this country will ever be abl to overcome the severe-- the fear and suspicio consideringhe world was bad enough with what went on in the 50 years ago in the old world politics terms the united states is the natural hegemon of the western hemisphere because it is the most porful economically and military and what have you. in the long run, it is a losing thing. the sun has set for instance. >> what would be your view on th intercontinental--

[inaudible] >> everything i know abouthat is legend. there's some of ms. degout and highway projects between houston and boston which will probably never get off the ground. >> was the attitude at it was just so embedded and not-- [inaible] >> well, i would hope so. i like mexico and it is a country with sad, sad histo. ittarted out almost without a chance and so did the other latin american countries. but, we could make more effort to listen to others and taking a stance. might learn something about it

and might get people to understand the language. not enough people can read or speak spanish. spanish shots to be the second langua in the united states but also learn more about the history. we are gary in what the country here. the united states citizens don't know very much about khanna babb either. d.d. you know we invaded candidate twice? they know it. the second time we did it in fact it said of the changes of events tt made canada candidate, just like when the united states invaded mexico would set up the chain of events that made mexico mexico in a slightly different w. it also though set off the civil war in mexico and it set off a bloody civil war in the united states and ithe long run, if

it wasn't for california gold, i don't know if you could say the united states gained back its $87 million that it cost them to fight the war. is there a hand over here? >> based on your great knowledge ofistory of the united states in mexico, as we go into e immigratn reform after we get through the health care reform, what is your viewn guest immigration, or if you are for immigration reform, what are the-- based on your htory? >> well, i would say it is pretty wl demonstrated that it is going to happen. people don't cross borders.

the total in this country is 12 million people now. the majority came from europe or africa of or asia legally on visas and then just stayed. you are not going to fi them. if it re legally possible to load them on school buses, the trains and buses would be 7,000 miles long and were you going to put tm? the united states economic policies towards latin american countries during the 20 a century has not done very much to help the situation. this has changed some in recent decades, but they existed as colonnades really

economically they were there to prode agricultural products and other products to the uted states and it would have been better all the way around it thi country would encourage industrialization a little bit more. but, when we do, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. have youeard of nafta? that sounded like a good idea. let's go encourage all these factory developments down along the border, that is fine but the united states believes in free tradend it has since jefferson ran his race. what we call globalization nowadays. well, when sources of labor opened up in asia, they were cheaper than what was in mexico and the factories moved to asa and they had been attracted to the borr. they had no jobs anymore. the jobs were in thenited

states though. another thing with the immigration reform typically mexican and central americans migrants across the boa-- border only stay half a year and then they go home. now they are afraid to go home because they will all get the rest that the border. what kind of sense does them a? they are not only illegal aliens but they a unhappy about it. they are not likely to attach themselves affectionately to this country when they are trapped. >> okay, so mexico is well-- if i understand you correctly. a lot of people without jobs or advantages, however that is a country that is rich in resources in silver and they have their own oil. is the a way that the masses of people in xico can put the

pressure through members on the government to make their lives better itead of coming over here? >> farby it from me to be a family adviser or counselor. they are getting better i hope, because of the breaking of one-party rule that went on for more than 70 years until the year 2000. and, there is getting to be a little bit more real democracy particularly in thstat and local goverents. the more educated people now thanhere used to be. they still have that common dante-- the bautista he calls himself in the still puts on tv

shows. lance distribution is still a serious problem. i would say, if the mexican central government wanted to art doing one thing to correct this, quick concentting everything on mexico city. it is the biggest city in the oil, 20 million people. it is in a geographic bubble but what about the other cities in mexico? some of the factories could be there. there are some but there is a tendency, this went on with the spanish, it went on under the aztecs, it went on before them that this was going to be the hub of the empire and therefore everything would comin and serve it, but mexico city's, industrial overhead and population could well be this thursday little bit better.

it would be a lot more economical instead of having to sip everything in and out of that place that th is as far as i'm willing to advise anybody. >> did they press education down there? >> sense 1968 disturbances, it has really gotten a lot better. but, and mexico has got some really fine universities. it needs more. >> the war seems to have in the united states and the way to train a lot of leadership that we read aut later, civil war, ulysses t and a number of people. it is there any of the mexican leaders that were at their

beginnings or skills honed in this? >> yeah, yeah. >> w are the ones we should know about? >> guest: most of the famous names during the time of the war with the united states got shoved out of the picture, but there is a whole young generation that comes along that either and directly participated in that war or had enough background that when the war of reform starts they are ready to go. the most famous of nor americans i suppose. what the heck is that? they actually did, during the

war with united state he comes in as a very young officer and the war is in reform and then when they-- in 1862 and 1863 and they are there until 1867, he is the great hero of that war. they did learn a lot from the mistakes of their misnaged armies particularly in the later stages of the war against the french but both the wars of reform and the wars against the french were mostly drill wars on both sides coming really savage. you took a bunch of prisoners and you shot them. on the united states side, and you mentioned a few of them, ulysses s. grantas a the tenet down there and to comfit shman was in california and robert e. lee was one of scott poche

engineers and had been and this whole roster of junior officers who become generals and u.s. civil r so you get a little of that on the mexican side but most of them came little later. the three reasons the united states, ifou could s it won the war, i am not really sure it did, but the weakness of the mexican side and secondly the superiority of the united states field artillery which was the best in the world at that time afd looked at the devastation it wreaked on both sides in the civil war. the third was these west pnt graduates who will field company ade officers. the generals rolling confident, whether they were politically appointed or not because the ones thatad been in the army

in careers were mock the terralex of the war of 1812, really not up to this. they got themselves mired in politics. that is something west pointers learned lesson from this, politics and military service don't mix. he politically interfered with the army is safety of american lives just tocore partisan points. his successors generally follow the lead of the west pointers and those who did not learned the lesss in the years met their peril. keep the politics at home and the commander in chief's job then is to facilitate the military campaigns.

>> historians have seen the great emphasis-- i take it with your emphasis on federalism, you would take exception at least to some degrewith that interpretation. >> there was rampant nationalism in the sense that we have the greatest nation of the civilized world. they had been since the ink dried the declaration of independence or the treaty but a paris in 1873 and mexico, i thinkhat the stresses of the war in the post-war period finally create a mexican national identity which revolves around, the way i interpreted here is guadalupe, who revealed to end indian and she looked like an indian but feed early 1820's tooker over because she supposedly represented them.

they were there white spanish catholic heritage and they were born in mexico but by the end i describe this change because the way the war, the treaty was signed, they were trying to hang onto their power at the top and they are willing to give away have their country just to stay there. they had moreroops athe end of 1848 outghting verrone people in these agrarian rebellions that they ever put in the field against the united states. and they were rising up and a few indians like lavar is. they got the idea, maybe we could do a little better. and in the end of this one chapter i say the virgin was not

krio yes, she was mexican. i think i am being told to shut the heck up. [laughter] >> their lots and lots of things that are tremendously interesting and well expressed and we will bring this to a close now. friends have prepared for is a wonderful reception with some punch and cookies and remember, we like to have people checked out books and we also like people to y books so be sure to patronize our table and david will be able sign some books for you. ank you all for coming. [applause] >> david clary is the author of adopted son, washington, lafayette in the fran back the say the revolution.

he's the former chiefistorian at the u.s. forest serce. to find that more about the author visit random house.com in search david clary. >> we e at the university of north florida talking with dr. aaron sheehan-dean about his bookwhy confederates fought", family and nation in civil war. in your bucket explores virginia soldiers and their filies in the civil war. why did you oo to concentrate on virginia as opposed to other confederate sdates? >> because virginia is the most portant leader of the warnd what i was looking at was ying to assess yalties of virginia soldiers are usually fighting in a national army close to their homethat got up them so their suect t the pressure of wanting to be home and want to defend their state as well and i want to see all those variables sort of played out. >> what types of storage emerge when you were writing the book? >> the main story was a surprising one, that traditional

over the course of dore confederates would give up and i found they tended to stay in in looking at the way iwhich the talk to their families about why they were staying with what i began in the main part of the book, the main argument. >> why did you find it were fighting in the first place? the there was certainly a strong enthusiasmuild on a sense of a the trail by the part of the north. virginia is a unique state in the upper south. virginia conservatives have put a lot behind lincoln, sort of went out on a limb extending himself to saying lincoln is no threat to us and after fort sumter lincoln cald up the troops and virginians the union as their see that as a betrayal. there is a strong outpouring of marshallnthusiasm and that is what gets them then and m concern with how, why did they stay in the question is confederate persistence. >> in addition to taking a look at some going into some of the diaries he take a connotative

look at who fought. what types of things to do come up with their? >> the first thing is the standard argument is the civil war is rich man's w in a poor man's ficht. rich counties overwhelmingly spt high numbers of men so in terms of corley schnee get a strong correlation between wealth and slaveholding endless mundt. the more wealthy county has the more men go to fight the richmond are represented and the army as oppod to a presented. the other statistical elent that emerged that was important s desertion and i found overall a 15% rate of desertion and the confedete forces, tempers and bause some of those go back but the important thing is the deserti peaks and 62. the traditional argument is that the peaks late in the war unsteadily goes up and in fact what i find is the sur in beakesnd 52 because men e angry about the draft and then it goes down and levels of featherbedding gives a continual escalation over the coursof the war.

>> was there a difference in how the soldiers did the war as opposed t people on the home front? >> vie 1864 those neustar to diverse but what is important about the cavil war is it is an all volunte ay and those soldiers are never far away from thei homes. there and constant contact with their families so they are much as part ofheir home committee as new communities and the army. by 64 particularly the trench warfare in petersburg which let's fert semont get the strongivergence where sgldiers have become quite hardens to confederate civilian suffering and they are doing things very differently than civilians are but that is late in the war. >> how did you conduct most of your research for the book? how did you compale it into a book? >> ridge lot of that was traveling to archives of brown virginia and the south, reading diaries in letters. diaries, lettersnd newspapers as well and a lot of statistical

drawing on a great regimental history series proded in the state of virginia that has compiled all the service records of virginia soldiers, so i created a statistically valid sample using those books and drawing soldier out and going back to the u.s. nsus and trying to get demographic information about soldiers', their rank in the hoehold, there mound of wealth and slaveldg and rent statistical assessments and try to bring thosewo bodies together to make a clear story. >>hy did you decide to read the book in the first place? >> i was interested in the question of sort of whye fight than that for me emerges thee most important element is that confederates for a long time particularly for lower and non-aveholding classes the argument has been it is a somewhat irrational corporate what does make sense for them to fight andy argument and what i tell my students if we have to

give the store colldors this incredibly would give ourselves. rationalizes bad way to put it that we find things to ourselves in ways that make sense and they did the same thing so it was trying to gure out how they understand it over time because we continue to fight warren b. continue to offer explations that makes sense to us and historically become quite baffling and i want to catch that dynamism and the change over time. >> we have been talking with dr. aaron sheehan-dean about his book "why confederates fought," family and nation in the civil war. >> thank you. >> did you know you can vie booktv pgrams on line? go to booktv.org. type the name of the author, bokor subject into the search area in the upper left-hand corner of the page. select the watch link. now you can view the entire program. you might also explore the recently on