New Mexico milestones: More centennial celebrations on the horizon

Oct. 21—Other New Mexico centennials

1922: First woman elected to high office in U.S. — Soledad Chávez Chacón became New Mexico's secretary of state.

1924: The Rotary Club of Santa Fe was created, 19 years after the formation of the National Association of Rotary Clubs in America.

1924: Designation of the Gila Wilderness — The U.S. Forest Service set aside 755,000 acres as the Gila Wilderness — the world's first designated wilderness. The original acreage later was divided and expanded and is now recognized as the Gila Wilderness, with 557,873 acres, and the adjacent Aldo Leopold Wilderness, with 202,016 acres. The designation marked the beginning of a national system of wilderness areas and led to the National Wilderness Act of 1964.

1924: De Vargas Hotel — William "Bill" Sargent rebuilt the burned-down hotel, now known as Hotel St. Francis.

1924: Indian Citizenship Act — The federal law granted citizenship to Indigenous residents. It was partly in response to thousands of Native Americans serving in the armed forces during World War I. By 1947, all states with significant tribal populations — except New Mexico and Arizona — had extended voting rights to Natives, and the two holdouts finally did so in 1948.

1924: Zozobra — Artist William Shuster Jr. created Zozobra as the highlight of a private party for Santa Fe-area artists and writers.

1925: La Fonda Hotel was acquired by the Atchinson, Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad and leased to Fred Harvey. It then is operated by the famed Harvey House hotel chain for more than 40 years.

1926: Route 66 designated — When the "Mother Road" was laid out in 1926, it followed Old Pecos Trail through Santa Fe. In 1937, the New Mexico section of the highway was shortened by 107 miles, bypassing Santa Fe.

1928: "The City Different" — Santa Fe gained its nickname via a city-sponsored advertising program, published to promote the 1928 Santa Fe Fiesta.

1928: Airport opens — Travel to New Mexico was forever changed with the opening of what's now known as the Albuquerque International Sunport. It gained that name in the 1960s via a naming contest. — B.S.

New Mexico's history echoed loudly in 2022, with centennial celebrations of mainstay events and institutions, including the Santa Fe Playhouse, La Fonda on the Plaza, and the Santa Fe Indian Market. A string of centennials is on the horizon, including the burning of Zozobra, designation of the Gila Wilderness, and rebuilding of De Vargas Hotel, all in 2024.

Given that New Mexico gained statehood in 1912, it's not a mystery why now-famous traditions started popping up shortly thereafter. Less evident, though, is what the new state looked and felt like in those early days — and how that perspective differed depending on one's culture.

In the early 1920s, only children were young enough to have been born in New Mexico following statehood — rather than in the Washington, D.C.-governed New Mexico Territory — and the region's oldest residents had been around for the end of Mexican rule here in 1848. The population had grown to nearly 400,000, double the number in 1900, and would rise to nearly 800,000 within three decades.

It was a time of great and rapid change, growth, and attempts to establish annual traditions — some of which have taken root and become Santa Fe institutions, while others vanished quickly. The upheaval disproportionately affected residents based partly on demographics, including race and social strata. The story can't be told with one voice, so several history experts lent theirs to provide a glimpse into the era that will be celebrated repeatedly during upcoming centennials.

Then and now

Several uncanny parallels link 1922 and 2022. In the former year, the nation had just emerged from the 1918 influenza pandemic, which killed an estimated 675,000 Americans and 50 million people worldwide. Today, the nation is weary of the danger posed by COVID-19, which has killed an estimated 1 million in this country and 6.5 million people worldwide.

The Colorado River Compact was signed in November 1922 at the Palace of the Governors. It divided the river into two basins for water-distribution purposes, with New Mexico and Colorado part of the upper basin.

"Well, we're dealing with that issue again today because of a lack of water. It's still part of our life," says state historian Rob Martinez, adding, "It's kind of chilling, and really exciting, how history does repeat itself."

One hundred years ago, news about Russia frequently appeared on The New Mexican's front pages, Martinez says. But the updates were about rebuilding, not aggression, as the revolution that ended the czarist system and ushered in communism had occurred only a few years earlier.

Martinez is one of five people with varying perspectives who shared their thoughts on issues such as what the state looked like 100 years ago; how well-intended cultural preservation efforts can be counterproductive; and how the term "poverty" can be misleading, especially here. Their responses to questions have been edited for length and clarity, as well as sorted by category.

Appearance to outsiders in 1922

Martinez: We have reports of [visitors] being shocked at how haphazard the towns were here. They were not in a grid pattern. There were just kind of homes here and there. And the buildings were made of mud, as they were described. There would be some painted walls, some painted furniture, but it would have been very rustic compared to what they were used to. So most of the time, most of the descriptions we have are not very flattering, and it's only in the 20th century that these things become beautiful and revered.

Valerie Rangel, City of Santa Fe historian: People came up the Camino Real, they hit Agua Fria, they freshened up. It was actually not necessarily a stopping point for food and trade; it was more of a wash stop. People would come in having the dust a little cleaned off of them by the time they got here so they were somewhat presentable to go to a party. It was very dismal. And when [people] came through and they encountered Santa Fe, they thought they were going to see culture and have food. They were highly disappointed with the cuisine. It was greasy mutton and chili, and they just were not happy.

Preservation and assimilation

Elysia Poon, Indian Arts Research Center director: In 1922, we were neck-deep in assimilationist policies — federal assimilationist policies that were affecting native communities. [There was an assumption] that Native communities would eventually assimilate into U.S. culture, or they would just plain die out, and that Native American cultures needed to be "saved" somehow. You end up with salvage ethnography when people believe that Native American cultures are going to die out, and they start collecting everything that they can out of the communities in order to "save" them. Does collecting everything out of the community that it belongs to help "save" a culture? It doesn't make any sense at all. They're seeing this decimation [of Native populations] happening, but they're building the museums at the same time, so it's not like one thing happened and the next occurred.

New Mexico's early identity

Martinez: By the 1800s, [New Mexicans] are mixed-blood. We're very Mexican. We're Pueblo and we're Navajo, Comanche. By the time we're part of Mexico, we fit in quite easily. We're a territory of Mexico. By the time the United States comes here in the mid-1800s, we're considered Mexican and that's how we're described. But we're not allowed to be a state because we're looked down on because we're Mexican. So 100 years ago, there was a pride in who we were and who we thought we were. Hispanic New Mexicans were heavily involved in government here. That was also a crucial element of who we were.

Carson Morris, history and literary arts program manager, National Hispanic Cultural Center: Even though we had such a low population [about 360,000 people in 1920], as a percentage of our population, we had sent more soldiers to World War I than any other state. I think there's a lot of reasons why people would join the military. There may have been a sense of wanting to show loyalty to the United States for some people.

Martinez: Distrusting outsiders is not a Santa Fe phenomenon. It's a New Mexico phenomenon. You've got to remember, we've always been a frontier; we've always had to kind of make do for ourselves. The Pueblo people were here first. And then other native groups: the Comanche, the Apache, the Navajo, they also had to make do. The Spanish came in, the Mexicans came in. And, you know, we were always on the edge of empire. We were not at the center of the Spanish Empire. We were on the edge of colonial Mexico. The same thing happened when we became part of the United States. So we've always had this kind of isolation, having to make do with what we have."

Mood of time

Carmella Padilla, author: When the Americans came in, we had been under Mexican rule for 25 years. There was a backlash of many people who wanted to stay affiliated with Mexico. That change included the railroad, which brought things that were equally good and bad — good in terms of some additional resources that were not here previously. But I don't think those changes were welcomed, because they enhanced the economy, but not in the way we think of the economy today. I think in many ways, so many people still felt linked to older times and older ways of life.

Martinez: What was it like in 1922? Well, people dressed a certain way. There were probably Model T cars on the Plaza in Santa Fe. It was probably an interesting amalgam of Mexican, Pueblo, and American architecture, and you heard English being spoken but you also heard Spanish and maybe even pueblo languages on the Plaza or in other places. It was a multicultural, international place.

Agricultural tradition

Rangel: The Spanish brought different horses and cattle and food and whatnot. But this Anglo wave changed the landscape in other ways. [They] began to dam the rivers. The 1920s were also the [beginning of the] Dust Bowl era, so there was this massive erosion happening [in the nearby Oklahoma Panhandle].

Martinez: People who live off the land — it doesn't matter what your background is, whether your ancestors are from Africa or the Middle East or Europe or Asia or the Americas — they didn't sit around thinking about things like statues or monuments or how to judge the past. They just didn't have the time or the energy to do that. They were too busy living the life that they had right in front of them."

What if Mexico had remained in charge?

Padilla: This would be a different place. There were a lot of advantages that came with Americanization — certainly, education levels, for as much as people complain about education [now] in New Mexico. Definitely, that was boosted by the American integration. I really think that our identity as an art colony, if you want to call it that, or just an arts destination, really has benefited. Local creativity always existed and was embedded in the culture, and it is celebrated in a way that may not have happened if it had just continued to be practiced within our communities.

Architecture and fires

Rangel: I think that the inflection of the railroad at the time, bringing new resources, really changed architecture. There's a lot of investment into architecture: significant buildings like orphanages and some of the first schools. We now have a system that works off fire hydrants, and we can put out fires fairly quickly. But back in the day, fires could get out of hand, and they burned down mega buildings several times. So things frequently were rebuilt here. It was actually better to have adobe; the mighty coolness of them contained fires more easily. And, you know, Easterners would come here and they would say, "Wow, you guys are so behind the times. It's archaic." But folks who had been living here for a long time realized that some of these things kind of helped them to survive.

Concept of poverty

Padilla: If you looked [New Mexico's communities] from an American standard, there's what you would call poverty. But these cultures were rich and vibrant, and creative and innovative, and resourceful and resilient, and full of faith. That is not, in my mind, a definition of "impoverished." They had rich tradition. That is, in my mind, the equivalent of, if not above, riches in resources and money.

Rangel: I remember going to a conference maybe three years ago in Mora, [New Mexico], and the premise was poverty. A farmer stood up and said, "Look, I don't know what y'all are talking about. We have water rights. We have land. We have the ability to cultivate that for our families. I don't see that as poverty. I don't know why we keep using that term. We don't have picket fences and two cars and whatever the status [symbols are] out East or elsewhere. But we are rich in culture. So why are we still having this conversation about poverty?"

Agency for Natives

Poon: While there was a lot of extraction coming on, I don't think it's necessarily wise to dismiss the agency of Native communities. There's this assumption that they're not making any choices for themselves [around 1922], which they are. They looked at [and created] what tourists or ethnographers were looking to collect. It's true of any real market economy. If you figure out what your buyer wants, it might not necessarily be what you want to create to satisfy your creative need or your community's needs, but it gets you what you want.

Agency for Hispanics

Morris: At that time [around 1922], New Mexico was still a majority-Hispanic state. So, actually becoming a state really helped the Hispanic population. With statehood, they were able to vote, and, actually, Mexican women had been really critical in fighting for the women's vote. [New Mexico approved women's suffrage in 1920.] So when Hispanic people were able to vote in New Mexico for their representatives, we start seeing a lot of Hispanic people in politics and representing the state — as opposed to the territorial period, when officials were appointed by Washington.

[At the same time] Native Americans were not allowed to vote in New Mexico until 1948. But for Hispanic people at that time, it gave them the political clout that they needed. I think it's safe to say that people had not voted in New Mexico before [under previous governments]. They had governors appointed by the governments of Spain or Mexico. In the 1920s, the majority of the population did speak Spanish still. A lot of schools were taught entirely in Spanish, especially in Northern New Mexico, in the 1920s. It's only following World War II that we saw a push to eradicate Spanish in the schools.

Judging the past

Martinez: We need to give our ancestors credit that they knew right from wrong. At some point, yes, slavery was acceptable. And then at some point, someone said, "No, we're not going to do that anymore." That's not studying the past through the present's lens; that's studying what actually happened. Things that were acceptable eventually become unacceptable. And that's part of the story. That's the unfolding of history. It's OK to look back critically and say, "Why was there slavery and why did it end? Why were there British colonists and why did they eventually say, 'We're not going to put up with this anymore, with taxation without representation; we're not going to be ruled by a monarchy anymore.'" So things change, and it's not just us judging the past. It's our ancestors judging their current situation at the time and saying, "We need to make a change."

Varying perspectives

Poon: People assume that there's one story to tell. Something I've always tried to emphasize as an educator is that it's important for museums to be diverse, because there's no one single story [that's completely accurate]. And it's important for kids to realize that they have a say in the telling of their own story and that just because they see something in a museum, that's not just the story. It's just one of many stories.