[...“Why do you call it
a massacre?” is the first thing Jim White III said over the phone when I told
him I was researching the Porvenir massacre. White is the trustee of the Brite
Ranch, the site of a cross-border raid by Mexicans on Christmas Day 1917, about
a month before the Porvenir massacre. When I explained that the
state-sanctioned extrajudicial execution of 15 men and boys met all the
criteria I could think of for a massacre, he shot back, “It sounds like you
already have your opinion.”]...
Who Writes History? The
Fight to Commemorate a Massacre by the Texas Rangers
In 1918, a
state-sanctioned vigilante force killed 15 unarmed Mexicans in Porvenir. When
their descendants applied for a historical marker a century later, they learned
that not everyone wants to remember one of Texas’ darkest days.
–
by Daniel Blue Tyx
November 26, 2018
The name of the town was
Porvenir, or “future.” In the early morning hours of January 28, 1918, 15
unarmed Mexicans and Mexican Americans were awakened by a state-sanctioned
vigilante force of Texas Rangers, U.S. Army cavalry and local ranchers. The men
and boys ranged in age from 16 to 72. They were taken from their homes, led to
a bluff over the Rio Grande and shot from 3 feet away by a firing squad. The
remaining residents of the isolated farm and ranch community fled across the
river to Mexico, where they buried the dead in a mass grave. Days later, the
cavalry returned to burn the abandoned village to the ground.
These, historians
broadly agree, are the facts of what happened at Porvenir. But 100 years later,
the meaning of those facts remains fiercely contested. In 2015, as the
centennial of the massacre approached, a group of historians and Porvenir
descendants applied for and was granted a Texas Historical Commission (THC)
marker. After a three-year review process, the THC approved the final text in
July. A rush order was sent to the foundry so that the marker would be ready in
time for a Labor Day weekend dedication ceremony planned by descendants. Then,
on August 3, Presidio County Historical Commission Chair Mona Blocker Garcia
sent an email to the THC that upended everything. Though THC records show that
the Presidio commission had been consulted throughout the marker approval
process, Garcia claimed to be “shocked” that the text was approved. She further
asserted, without basis, that “the militant Hispanics have turned this marker
request into a political rally and want reparations from the federal government
for a 100-year-old-plus tragic event.”
Porvenir, Texas
historical commission, massacre
Captain James Fox
(left), the massacre’s ringleader, voluntarily retired and rejoined the Texas
Rangers a few years after the massacre. This picture was taken following a raid
in Brownsville. THE ROBERT RUNYON PHOTOGRAPH COLLECTION, IMAGE 00097, COURTESY
OF THE CENTER FOR AMERICAN HISTORY, THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN
Four days later, Presidio
County Attorney Rod Ponton sent a follow-up letter. Without identifying
specific errors in the marker text, he demanded that the dedication ceremony be
canceled and the marker’s production halted until new language could be agreed
upon. Ponton speculated, falsely, that the event was planned as a “major
political rally” for Beto O’Rourke with the participation of La Raza Unida
founding member José Ángel Gutiérrez, neither of whom was involved.
Nonetheless, THC History Programs Director Charles Sadnick sent an email to
agency staff the same day: “After getting some more context about where the
marker sponsor may be coming from, we’re halting production on the marker.”
The American Historical
Association quickly condemned the THC’s decision, as did the office of state
Senator José Rodríguez, a Democrat whose district includes both Presidio County
and El Paso, where the ceremony was to be held. Historians across the country
also spoke out against the decision. Sarah Zenaida Gould, director of the Museo
del Westside in San Antonio and cofounder of Latinos in Heritage Conservation,
responded in an email to the agency that encapsulates the views of many of the
historians I interviewed: “Halting the marker process to address this statement
as though it were a valid concern instead of a dog whistle is insulting to all
people of color who have personally or through family history experienced state
violence.”
How did a last-gasp
effort, characterized by factual errors and inflammatory language, manage to
convince the state agency for historic preservation to reverse course on a
marker three years in the making and sponsored by a young Latina historian with
an Ivy League pedigree and Texas-Mexico border roots? An Observer
investigation, involving dozens of interviews and hundreds of emails obtained
through an open records request, reveals a county still struggling to move on
from a racist and violent past, far-right amateur historians sowing
disinformation and a state agency that acted against its own best judgment.
The Porvenir massacre
controversy is about more than just the fate of a single marker destined for a
lonely part of West Texas. It’s about who gets to tell history, and the
continuing relevance of the border’s contested, violent and racist past to
events today.
–
Several rooms in Benita
Albarado’s home in Uvalde are almost overwhelmed by filing cabinets and stacks
of clipboards, the ever-growing archive of her research into what happened at
Porvenir. For most of her life, Benita, 74, knew nothing about the massacre.
What she did know was that her father, Juan Flores, had terrible nightmares,
and that in 1950 he checked himself in to a state mental hospital for symptoms
that today would be recognized as PTSD. When she asked her mother what was
wrong with him, she always received the same vague response: “You don’t
understand what he’s been through.”
Porvenir
Narciso and Juan Flores,
sons of massacre victim Longino Flores and survivor Juana Flores. Courtesy
Monica Muñoz Martinez/Bullock Texas State History Museum
In 1998, Benita and her
husband, Buddy, began tracing their family trees. Benita was perplexed that she
couldn’t find any documentation about her grandfather, Longino Flores. Then she
came across the archival papers of Harry Warren, a schoolteacher, lawyer and
son-in-law of Tiburcio Jáquez, one of the men who was murdered. Warren had made
a list of the victims, and Longino’s name was among them. Warren also described
how one of his students from Porvenir had come to his house the next morning to
tell him what happened, and then traveled with him to the massacre site to
identify the bodies, many of which were so mutilated as to be virtually
unrecognizable. Benita immediately saw the possible connection. Her father, 12
at the time, matched Warren’s description of the student.
Benita and Buddy drove
from Uvalde to Odessa, where her father lived, with her photocopied papers. “Is
that you?” she asked. He said yes. Then, for the first time in 80 years, he
began to tell the story of how he was kidnapped with the men, but then sent
home because of his age; he was told that the others were only going to be questioned.
To Benita and Buddy’s amazement, he remembered the names of 12 of the men who
had been murdered. They were the same as those in Harry Warren’s papers. He
also remembered the names of the ranchers who had shown up at his door. Some of
those, including the ancestors of prominent families still in Presidio County,
had never been found in any document.
Porvenir, history
Juan Flores at the
Porvenir gravesite. COURTESY BENITA ALBARADO
Talking about the
massacre proved healing for Flores. His nightmares stopped. In 2000, at age 96,
he decided that he wanted to return to Porvenir. Buddy drove them down an old
mine road in a four-wheel-drive truck. Flores pointed out where his old
neighbors used to live, even though the buildings were gone. He guided Buddy to
the bluff where the men were killed — a different location than the one
commonly believed by local ranchers to be the massacre site. His memory proved
to be uncanny: At the bluff, the family discovered a pre-1918 military bullet
casing, still lying on the Chihuahuan desert ground.
Benita and Buddy began
advocating for a historical marker in 2000, soon after their trip to Porvenir.
“A lot of people say that this was a lie,” Buddy told me. “But if you’ve got a
historical marker, the state has to acknowledge what happened.” Their efforts
were met by resistance from powerful ranching families, who held sway over the
local historical commission. The Albarados had already given up when they met
Monica Muñoz Martinez, a Yale graduate student from Uvalde, who interviewed
them for her dissertation. In 2013, Martinez, by then an assistant professor at
Brown University, co-founded Refusing to Forget, a group of historians aiming
to create broader public awareness of border violence, including Porvenir and
other extrajudicial killings of Mexicans by Texas Rangers during the same
period. The most horrific of these was La Matanza, in which dozens of Mexicans
and Mexican Americans were murdered in the Rio Grande Valley in 1915.
In 2006, the THC created
the Undertold Markers program, which seemed tailor-made for Porvenir. According
to its website, the program is designed to “address historical gaps, promote
diversity of topics, and proactively document significant underrepresented
subjects or untold stories.” Unlike the agency’s other marker programs, anyone
can apply for an undertold marker, not just county historical commissions.
Martinez’s application for a Porvenir massacre marker was accepted in 2015.
Though the approval
process for the Porvenir marker took longer than usual, by the summer of 2018
everything appeared to be falling into place. On June 1, Presidio County
Historical Commission chair Garcia approved the final text. (Garcia told me
that she thought she was approving a different text. Her confusion is difficult
to understand, since the text was attached to the digital form she submitted
approving it.) Martinez began coordinating with the THC and Arlinda Valencia, a
descendant of one of the victims, to organize a dedication ceremony in El Paso.
“They weren’t just
simple farmers. I seriously doubt that they were just killed for no reason.”
In mid-June, Valencia
invited other descendants to the event and posted it on Facebook. She began
planning a program to include a priest’s benediction, a mariachi performance
and brief remarks by Martinez, Senator Rodríguez and a representative from the
THC. The event’s climax would be the unveiling of the plaque with the names of
the 15 victims.
Then the backlash began.
–
“Why do you call it a
massacre?” is the first thing Jim White III said over the phone when I told him
I was researching the Porvenir massacre. White is the trustee of the Brite
Ranch, the site of a cross-border raid by Mexicans on Christmas Day 1917, about
a month before the Porvenir massacre. When I explained that the
state-sanctioned extrajudicial execution of 15 men and boys met all the
criteria I could think of for a massacre, he shot back, “It sounds like you
already have your opinion.”
For generations,
ranching families like the Brites have dominated the social, economic and
political life of Presidio County. In a visit to the Marfa & Presidio
County Museum, I was told that there were almost no Hispanic surnames in any of
the exhibits, though 84 percent of the county is Hispanic. The Brite family
name, however, was everywhere.
White and others in
Presidio County subscribe to an alternative history of the Porvenir massacre,
centering on the notion that the Porvenir residents were involved in the bloody
Christmas Day raid.
“They weren’t just
simple farmers,” White told me, referring to the victims. “I seriously doubt
that they were just killed for no reason.” Once he’d heard about the historical
marker, he said, he’d talked to everyone he knew about it, including former Texas
Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson and Mona Blocker Garcia.
Porvenir
Presidio County
Historical Commission Chair Mona Blocker Garcia at her Marfa home. Sarah
Vasquez
I visited Garcia at her
Marfa home, an 1886 adobe that’s the same age as the venerable Marfa County
Courthouse down the street. Garcia, 82, is Anglo, and married to a former oil
executive whose ancestry, she explained, is Spanish and French Basque. A
Houston native, she retired in the 1990s to Marfa, where she befriended the
Brite family and became involved in local history. She told me that she had
shared a draft text of the marker with the Brites, and they had agreed that it
was factually inaccurate.
Garcia cited a story a
Brite descendant had told her about a young goat herder from Porvenir who
purportedly witnessed the Christmas Day raid, told authorities about the
perpetrators from his community and then disappeared without a trace into a
witness protection program in Oklahoma. When I asked if there was any evidence
that the boy actually existed, she acknowledged the story was “folklore.”
Still, she said, “the story has lasted 100 years. Why would anybody make
something like that up?”
The Brite ranch.
The Brite Ranch. Bryan
Wildenthal Memorial Library/Sul Ross State University
The actual history is
quite clear. In the days after the massacre, the Texas Rangers commander,
Captain J.M. Fox, initially reported that Porvenir residents had fired on the
Rangers. Later, he claimed that residents had participated in the Christmas Day
raid. Subsequent investigations by the Mexican consulate, the U.S. Army and
state Representative J.T. Canales concluded that the murdered men were unarmed
and innocent, targeted solely because of their ethnicity by a vigilante force
organized at the Brite Ranch. As a result, in June 1918, five Rangers were
dismissed, Fox was forced to resign and Company B of the Texas Rangers was
disbanded.
But justice remained
elusive. In the coming years, Fox re-enlisted as captain of Company A, while
three of the dismissed lawmen found new employment. One re-enlisted as a
Ranger, a second became a U.S. customs inspector and the third was hired by the
Brite Ranch. No one was ever prosecuted. As time passed, the historical records
of the massacre, including Harry Warren’s papers, affidavits from widows and
other relatives and witness testimony from the various investigations, were
largely forgotten. In their place came texts like Walter Prescott Webb’s The
Texas Rangers: A Century of Frontier Defense, which played an outsize role in
the creation of the heroic myth of the Texas Rangers. Relying entirely on
interviews with the murderers themselves, Webb accepted at face value Fox’s
discredited version of events. For more than 50 years, Webb’s account was
considered the definitive one of the massacre — though, unsurprisingly, he
didn’t use that word.
–
An Observer review of
hundreds of emails shows that the state commission was aware of potential
controversy over the marker from the very beginning. In an email from 2015,
Executive Director Mark Wolfe gave John Nau, the chair of the THC’s executive
committee, a heads-up that while the marker was supported by historical
scholarship, “the [Presidio County Historical Commission] opposes the marker.”
The emails also demonstrate that the agency viewed the claims of historical
inaccuracies in the marker text made by Mona Blocker Garcia and the county
commission as minor issues of wording.
On August 6, the day
before the decision to halt the marker, Charles Sadnick, the history programs
director, wrote Wolfe to say that the “bigger problem” was the ceremony, where
he worried there might be disagreements among Presidio County residents, and
which he described as “involving some politics which we don’t want a part of.”
What were the politics
that the commission was worried about, and where were these concerns coming
from? Garcia’s last-minute letter may have been a factor, but it wasn’t the
only one. For the entire summer, Glenn Justice, a right-wing amateur historian
who lives in a rural gated community an hour outside San Angelo, had been the
driving force behind a whisper campaign to discredit Martinez and scuttle the
dedication ceremony.
Porvenir
From left: Amateur
historian Glenn Justice, former Texas Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson and
archaeologist David Keller during a 2015 excavation at the massacre site.
Jessica Lutz/IWMF Fellow Adelante Reporting Initiative
“There are radicals in
the ‘brown power’ movement that only want the story told of Rangers and [the]
Army and gringos killing innocent Mexicans,” Justice told me when we met in his
garage, which doubles as the office for Rimrock Press, a publishing company
whose catalog consists entirely of Justice’s own work. He was referring to
Refusing to Forget and in particular Martinez, the marker’s sponsor.
Justice has been
researching the Porvenir massacre for more than 30 years, starting when he
first visited the Big Bend as a graduate student. He claims to be, and probably
is, the first person since schoolteacher Harry Warren to call Porvenir a
“massacre” in print, in a master’s thesis published by the University of Texas
at El Paso in 1991. Unlike White and Garcia, Justice doesn’t question the
innocence of the Porvenir victims. But he believes that additional “context” is
necessary to understand the reasons for the massacre, which he views as an
aberration, rather than a representatively violent part of a long history of
racism. “There have never been any problems between the races to speak of [in
Presidio County],” he told me.
Porvenir
Filming the
as-yet-unreleased documentary Porvenir, Texas. Courtesy Andrew Shapter
In 2015, Justice teamed
up with former Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson and Sul Ross State University
archaeologist David Keller on a privately funded excavation at the massacre
site. He is working on a new book about the bullets and bullet casings they
found — which he believes implicate the U.S. Army cavalry in the shooting — and
also partnered with Patterson to produce a documentary. But they’d run out of
money, and the film was taken over by noted Austin filmmaker Andrew Shapter,
who pitched the project to PBS and Netflix. In the transition, Justice was
demoted to the role of one of 12 consulting historians. Meanwhile, Martinez was
given a prominent role on camera.
Justice was disgruntled
when he learned that the dedication ceremony would take place in El Paso. He
complained to organizer Arlinda Valencia and local historical commission
members before contacting Ponton, the county attorney, and Amanda Shields, a
descendant of massacre victim Manuel Moralez.
“I didn’t want to take
my father to a mob scene,” Shields told me over the phone, by way of explaining
her opposition to the dedication ceremony. She believed the rumor that O’Rourke
and Gutiérrez would be involved.
Porvenir
Arlinda Valencia, a
descendant of a Porvenir victim, is frustrated by the Texas Historical
Commission’s handling of the Porvenir marker. Courtesy Arlinda Valencia
In August, Shields
called Valencia to demand details about the program for the ceremony. At the
time, she expressed particular concern about a potential Q&A event with
Martinez that would focus on parallels between border politics and violence in
1918 and today.
“This is not a political
issue,” Shields told me. “It’s a historical issue. With everything that was
going on, we didn’t want the ugliness of politics involved in it.” By
“everything,” she explained, she was referring primarily to the issue of family
separation. Benita and Buddy Albarado told me that Shields’ views represent a
small minority of descendants.
Martinez said that the
idea of ignoring the connections between past and present went against her
reasons for fighting to get a marker in the first place. “I’m a historian,” she
said. “It’s hard to commemorate such a period of violence, in the midst of
another ongoing humanitarian crisis, when this period of violence shaped the
institutions of policing that we have today. And that cannot be relegated to
the past.”
–
After communicating with
Justice and Shields, Ponton phoned THC Commissioner Gilbert “Pete” Peterson,
who is a bank investment officer in Alpine. That call set in motion the sequence
of events that would ultimately derail the marker. Peterson immediately emailed
Wolfe, the state commission’s executive director, to say that the marker was
becoming “a major political issue.” Initially, though, Wolfe defended the
agency’s handling of the marker. “Frankly,” Wolfe wrote in his reply, “this
might just be one where the [Presidio County Historical Commission] isn’t going
to be happy, and that’s why these stories have been untold for so long.”
Peterson wrote back to say that he had been in touch with members of the THC
executive committee, which consists of 15 members appointed by either former
Governor Rick Perry or Governor Greg Abbott, and that an email about the
controversy had been forwarded to THC chair John Nau. Two days later, Peterson added,
“This whole thing is a burning football that will be thrown to the media.”
At a meeting of the
Presidio County Historical Commission on August 17, Peterson suggested that the
executive board played a major role in the decision to pause production of the
marker. “I stopped the marker after talking to Rod [Ponton],” Peterson said.
“I’ve spent quite a bit of time talking with the chairman and vice-chairman [of
the THC]. What we have said, fairly emphatically, is that there will not be a
dedication in El Paso.” Through a spokesperson, Wolfe said that the executive
committee is routinely consulted and the decision was ultimately his.
Porvenir
The Marfa & Presidio
County Museum includes almost no Hispanic surnames in its exhibits. Sarah
Vasquez
The spokesperson said,
“The big reason that the marker was delayed was to be certain about its
accuracy. We want these markers to stand for generations and to be as accurate
as possible.”
With no marker to
unveil, Valencia still organized a small commemoration. Many descendants,
including Benita and Buddy Albarado, chose not to attend. Still, the event was
described by Jeff Davis, a THC representative in attendance, as “a near perfect
event” whose tone was “somber and respectful but hopeful.”
–
Most of THC’s executive
committee members are not historians. The chair, John Nau, is CEO of the
nation’s largest Anheuser-Busch distributor and a major Republican party donor.
His involvement in the Porvenir controversy was not limited to temporarily
halting the marker. In August, he also instructed THC staff to ask the Presidio
historical commission to submit applications for markers commemorating raids by
Mexicans on white ranches during the Mexican Revolution, which Nau described as
“a significant but largely forgotten incident in the state’s history.”
Garcia confirmed that
she had been approached by THC staff. She added that the THC had suggested two
specific topics: the Christmas Day raid and a subsequent raid at the Neville
Ranch.
The idea of additional plaques
to provide so-called context that could be interpreted as justifying the
massacre — or at the very least setting up a false moral equivalence — appears
to have mollified critics like White, Garcia and Justice. The work on a revised
Porvenir massacre text proceeded quickly, with few points of contention, once
it began in mid-September. The marker was sent to the foundry on September 18.
“It’s hard to
commemorate such a period of violence, in the midst of another ongoing
humanitarian crisis, when this period of violence shaped the institutions of
policing that we have today.”
In the end, the Porvenir
descendants will get their marker — but it may come at a cost. Martinez called
the idea of multiple markers “deeply unsettling” and not appropriate for the
Undertold Marker program. “Events like the Brite Ranch raid and the Neville
raid have been documented by historians for over a century,” she said. “These
are not undertold histories. My concern with having a series of markers is
that, again, it casts suspicion on the victims of these historical events. It
creates the logic that these raids caused this massacre, that it was
retribution for these men and boys participating.”
In early November, the
THC unexpectedly announced a dedication ceremony for Friday, November 30. The
date was one of just a few on which Martinez, who was still planning on
organizing several public history events in conjunction with the unveiling, had
told the agency months prior that she had a schedule conflict. In an email to Martinez,
Sadnick said that it was the only date Nau could attend this year, and that it
was impossible for agency officials to make “secure travel plans” once the
legislative session began in January.
A handful of
descendants, including Shields and the Albarados, still plan to attend. “This
is about families having closure,” Shields told me. “Now, this can finally be
put to rest.”
The Albarados are livid
that the THC chose a date that, in their view, prioritized the convenience of
state and county officials over the attendance of descendants — including their
own daughters, who feared they wouldn’t be able to get off work. They also hope
to organize a second, unofficial gathering at the marker site next year, with
the participation of more descendants and the Refusing to Forget historians.
“We want people to know the truth of what really happened [at Porvenir],” Buddy
told me, “and to know who it was that got this historical marker put there.”
Others, like Arlinda
Valencia, planned to stay home. “Over 100 years ago, our ancestors were
massacred, and the reason they were massacred was because of lies that people
were stating as facts,” she told me in El Paso. “They called them ‘bandits,’
when all they were doing was working and trying to make a living. And now, it’s
happening again.”
Read the most updated
version of the historical marker text below.
Do you think free access
to journalism like this is important? The Texas Observer is known for its
fiercely independent, uncompromising work—which we are pleased to provide to
the public at no charge in this space. That means we rely on the generosity of
our readers who believe that this work is important. You can chip in for as
little as 99 cents a month. If you believe in this mission, we need your help.
Daniel Blue Tyx lives in
McAllen. His work has appeared in Best American Travel Writing, the Gettysburg
Review, CutBank and elsewhere.
CONTACT
The Texas Observer
54 Chicon Street
Austin, Texas 78702
(512) 477-0746
Email the Observer
© 2020 The Texas
Observer. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy
Terms and Conditions
National Latino
Farmers & Ranchers Trade Association
1029 Vermont
Avenue, NW, Suite 601
Washington, DC
20005
Office: (202)
628-8833
Fax No.: (202)
393-1816
Email: latinofarmers@live.com
Twitter: @NLFRTA
Website: www.NLFRTA.org
No comments:
Post a Comment