File talk:Mexico states evolution.gif

	This file is rated FM-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Maps This file is within the scope of WikiProject Maps, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Maps and Cartography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MapsWikipedia:WikiProject MapsTemplate:WikiProject MapsMaps articles

I congratulate the author for making this extraordinary contribution. However, I would like to note a couple of things regarding the map in relation to the historic revisionism portrayed (or lack thereof) in the evolution of the Mexican states:

• Central America was part of Mexico from 1821 to 1823. Even on the Archivo General de la Nación maps of the evolution of the Mexican territory include Central America.
• The Republic of Rio Grande was not constitutionally independent, but only in a de facto manner and for a matter of a couple of months. It didn't "rejoin" Mexico. The "insurrection" was fought by (and defeated) by the centralist troops of Santa Anna. It didn't rejoin: it was forced not to secede. If the Republic of Rio Grande is considered an fully independent nation that rejoined Mexico, then so was Zacatecas, which also declared its independence when centralism was established, but whose troops were also defeated by Santa Anna. On the other hand, Santa Anna's forces could not defeat the forces of either Texas or Yucatán, and both became full independent nations. The territorial acquisition/evolution map of the US, for example does not exclude the Confederate States because they did not secede successfully, but were brought back to the Union by war. So is the case with Zacatecas and the Republic of Rio Grande.
• The Republic of Yucatán was de jure independent on two occasions, and not one: from 1841-1843 and from 1846-1848. On both occasions the "insurrection" defeated Santa Anna, a new constitution of the independent nation was drafted (ergo they became a de jure independent nation), and on both occasions it was through negotiations that Yucatán rejoined Mexico. The first time Yucatán rejoined Mexico under the condition that it was not going to be treated as a "province" or "department" but as a "state" which allowed them to keep their constitution and trade tariffs. The second time it was negotiated that Yucatán would rejoin Mexico if Mexico would send the army to fight back the indigenous insurrection which had destabilized the country (in what was called "La Guerra de Castas", which lasted for several decades).

--theDúnadan 17:06, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

• I believe the first point is addressed in that this image begins in 1824, with the adoption of the constitution. Including Central America in the map to make this point would take a large amount of space for a relatively minor point, and I don't know about the legal status of the states/territories before the adoption of the constitution. Note that when Soconusco becomes part of Chiapas in 1842, it is labelled as "rejoins," implying that at least that part of Central America had been part of Mexico before the constitution. Rigadoun (talk) 18:06, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Then the image should begin with the independence of Mexico, regardless of the status of the regions that integrate(d) it. After all, the federation was dissolved in two separate occasions in which all states were transformed into departments (1st time) or provinces (2nd time). And, there was a constitution before 1824, the Reglamento Provisional Político del Imperio Mexicano, which makes the starting point of 1824 as arbitrary as selecting the 1857 constitution or the 1917 constitution. It makes more sense to start the map in 1821, the year when Mexico became independent, regardless of the political structure and form of government chosen at the time.

However, I am far more concerned about the implied de jure independence of the Republic of Rio Grande (which didn't happen) and the omission of the first de jure independence of Yucatán (in which a progressive constitution was drafted).

--theDúnadan 18:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

The information I've seen says what Yucatan did everything but actually declare independence, because they received reassurances from Santa Anna. When he went back on those, THEN they finally pulled the lever. As for picking 1824, it doesn't seem too arbitrary to me, but the primary reason I didn't go before that was lack of information on the makeup of the provinces. As for the Republic of the Rio Grande I'll fix that when I figure out the best way, I'm aware of the issue. --Golbez 19:11, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for addressing these concerns. I have been trying to do some research on the whole Yucatán thing. I will provide the links to references or books soon. According to the Yucatán article, the state was independent on two occasions, but I want to verify the references that are provided there. One other minor concern, it isn't really that important: when DF was created, its size was relatively small, and was defined to be the territory within a radius of 5.2 miles from the Central Square (thus making it a perfect circle). It wasn't until 1854 that it was extended to the the area it has today (minor differences in 1902). This map shows the Federal District of 1824 as a perfect circle. --theDúnadan 14:12, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

While not going into great detail about it, the 2000 edition of the Historia General de Mexico (pp 544-549) goes through the troubles Mexico faced by the central government of the time with some states that wanted to keep a federal republic, it also mentions that Yucatan "separated" twice from the Republic during this period, only "rejoining" in 1848 when a sovereign federal government was restored. In page 550 it says that Yucatan was "neutral" during the U.S. invasion as to avoid a blockade of its ports by the American navy. Words in quots are the actual the words in the text, so feel free to interpret away. 189.136.251.57 05:38, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Also of interest may be the fact that many of the borders between a large number of states are not described in any piece of legislation (i.e. many are de facto borders). In fact the issue of state borders in the Yucatan peninsula has spent a long time already in the Supreme Court. An excellent (and up to date) reference on this is an atlas researched by INEGI (ISBN 970-13-4729-3) 189.136.251.57 05:46, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Interesting, thank you. As for Yucatan, I think (as stated above) that it said it would come back if certain conditions were met; they weren't, so it went away again. --Golbez 06:30, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

There's not enough time to both follow changes on the map and read the text on the side. 82.71.48.158 11:40, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Why is the Federal Republic of Central America (United Central Provinces of America) not included? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.102.210.163 (talk) 02:52, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

It is. Way down there. The part of it that became part of Mexico, at least. --Golbez (talk) 03:03, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

A pause feature would be nice so as the viewer could look at the time period better or a feature where you control the progression in the picture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.108.192.168 (talk) 14:49, 12 September 2008 (UTC)