Navigate Messages: by Date - in Thread
Main Index - Date Index - Thread Index
 

Re: [ranchos] racial classifications

 
Hi Erlinda--
 
If you have access to Ranchos 2, look in this folder: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Ranchos2/files/Racial%20Classification/ .  The varying names indicated the "amount" of indigenous, African, or Spanish blood a person had, although by no means should the priest's words be taken as accurate.   I think sometimes the priest would base his judgment on what he saw.  The Spanish had quite a complicated process.  The specific name was supposed to indicate the racial measure of each person-- so if you had x amount of Spanish blood and y amount of indigenous blood, there was a specific name to indicate that.  Also, look in the Ranchos archives, since I think there was a discussion on this topic not too long ago.
 
Last year the Los Angeles County Museum of Art had an exhibition of paintings that depicted the blending of the different races, and it was a fascinating experience.  Looking at the exhibit reminds me how much race is still an issue, then (300-400 years ago), and now.  When I've talked with relatives, even today, many of them describe others in terms of their skin color-- "people from that part of Jalisco are light-skinned," for example. 
 
Rosalinda

-----Original Message-----
From: Erlinda Castanon-Long
Sent: Aug 10, 2005 6:48 PM
To: ranchos@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [ranchos] racial classifications

I'm hoping someone has the answer to why different classification are
used for the same race.  I'm working on my Rolon line from Zapotlan El
Grande and Tamazula.. Listings include Mulato, Lobo and Morisco for
Blacks... why are they not all called the same thing? These are
marriage records from the mid 1700's. They also put Blacks in a
different leger than Espanoles and Mestizo's, does anyone know if
there is a reason for this?
Linda from Wa.



YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS