Talk:Texan Santa Fe Expedition/Archive 1

Untitled

I just started this one but I have to admit that I've never been to Texas or New Mexico and only got interested after reading Dead Man's Walk. I'm sure there are some Texans out there that have a much better understanding of this than me so feel free to edit!--Charlie Perry 20:20, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Larry McMurtry is an excellent writer, but his fiction is, after all, fiction. For example, Lonesome Dove is nowhere near the Rio Grande, it is in Tarrant County. But that has nothing to do with the Santa Fe Expedition. I need to do some more research on this myself, but I remember studying Texas History while a student at Houston Baptist University (Yes, I'm a Texan). We Texans believe that the treaty signed by the dictator Santa Anna and the then General of the Texas army, Sam Houston, declared the Rio Grande as the boundary between the two sovereign nations. However, the area south of Nueces Creek was disputed during the years of the Republic of Texas. The towns of El Paso and Santa Fe did not participate in the revolution, but the Texians (as they were called then) felt that both towns were included in their territory. Lamar sent the expedition westward in the hope of securing the territory and declaring to the world where the southern and western borders of the Republic were with no further debate. When the expedition arrived at El Paso, the residents welcomed them with open arms. El Paso has been part of Texas ever since. But the problems arose during the march from there to Santa Fe. By the time McLeod reached the town, the Mexican army was already there. It must be further noted that after the war with Mexico in 1846, the western boundary of the state of Texas did indeed include Santa Fe. But Texas sold the land between El Paso and Santa Fe to the US government to help overcome the state’s economic problems. I can do some more research on this and add to it. I still have my college text book. (David Foster - March 20, 2006)

Sounds good. Just be aware that there is another article Texas Santa Fe Expedition which needs merging into this one or vice versa. user: TBC was doing something about this I think--CharlieP 11:10, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the spelling of Texican to Texian because it is my understanding that the pioneers that settled in the 1820's called themselves Texicans, but the later generation of the 1830's shortened it to Texian. By the time of statehood, the word had been shortened again to Texan, like it is now. I changed the title of Sam Houston because at the time he was the General. David G. Burnet was President pro tempore at the time. Houston was elected the first President of the Republic of Texas later in 1836. The article in Texas Santa Fe Expedition is good, but is still very short. (David Foster - March 30, 2006) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.242.255.68 (talk • contribs)

Merger

Two titles for the same event.--Rockero 03:54, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You chose the wrong one. Fix'd. -LlywelynII (talk) 20:03, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: Or not. You merged these badly, so that there're two talk pages and histories. -LlywelynII (talk) 20:09, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Needs Admin Help

The previous editors, when moving this page, orphaned the edit history and talk page back at Santa Fe Expedition. If someone could combine the two and iron everything out, that'd be great. -LlywelynII (talk) 20:10, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]