Introduction

For decades. the Mexican northwest has captured the imagination of scholars and the general public. It has been portrayed as a region of untold mineral wealth, insurgent Apaches and Yaquis, independent cowboys, border bandits, rugged miners, self-reliant women, wily smugglers, revolutionary candillos; and recently as the home of conservative business and political interests. At different moments, these seemingly contrary forces have influenced the region's history and stamped its culture.

A lucrative mining economy during the late nineteenth century and Sonoran exploits during the revolution thrust the image of the norteños onto the national stage. Military charges by Yaqui soldiers and the exploits of Sonoran generals during the revolution framed how many Mexicans and Americans viewed norteños. Sonorans such as Alvaro Obregón and Plutarco Elías Calles dominated the postrevolutionary period, guiding the destiny of Mexico until Lázaro Cárdenas wrested power from the northerners. Images of Sonoran norteños portrayed in the popular culture earned them a special place in both the politics and the folklore of Mexico and the United States.

This book began as an attempt to uncover the roots of northwest Mexican society and how it influenced the nature of Sonoran participation in the revolution. As the work developed, it turned into an analysis of the transformation Sonora experienced from a neglected provincia interna, an internal frontier, to a bustling and influential border state during the last decades of the nineteenth century. In exploring this process, this study breaks the artificial boundary that views the people of

northern Mexico and the southwest United States only within their national borders. Situated between Mexico proper to the south and the United States to the north, the norteño reflects a dual cultural experience: that of the northern Mexican and, to a lesser extent, that of the American. Northwest Mexican society owes as much to face-to-face border interaction as it does to exchanges with the indigenous population, the development of mining towns, haciendas, and urban centers, and to the growing presence of Sonorans and Yaquis in the United States southwest. These factors imply that studies of this region should not be limited exclusively by national boundaries or limited to interaction among border towns, but instead should look at the comprehensive process of change occurring throughout society. Reflecting this integrative approach, the first chapters of the book examine the character of society, commercial structures, conflict with the indigenous populations and early contact with foreigners. Subsequent chapters address increased border exchanges, the arrival of the railroad, the founding of twin border towns, life in mining camps, the new social order, conflict with immigrants, and the multiple fissures evident in Sonoran society by 1900.

The establishment of cross-border relations brought to the forefront a host of new issues, including contending views on modernization, the survival of traditional cultural practices, and conflictive perspectives on identity. It also redefined old issues such as commerce, politics, mining, land use, labor, and relations with the indigenous population. Rather than being simply passive recipients of American-inspired change, Sonoran merchants and hacendados actively participated in the reorganization of their state. No single event determined the restructuring of Sonoran society. The border provides the context for change driven by political interests, construction of the Sonoran railroad, commercial interaction, immigration, and foreign investments in mining and agriculture.

After years of isolation, northwestern Mexican elites, like their counterparts today, ardently supported free trade with the United States. Trade with California and Arizona reinforced their expectations despite repeated forays by American filibusters. Within four decades, from 1860 to 1900, the Mexican northwest underwent a pronounced social and economic reorientation as a border economy took root. The establishment of a border did not restrain foreign capital, nor did it restrict cultural interaction. As Mexicans and Americans came into contact, a

far-reaching exchange of customs took place on both sides of the international line, producing a complex web of social and cultural interrelations.

Border interaction added another dimension to the rich history of the Mexican northwest. The stalwart image of the independent and rebellious norteños had its foundations in the state's early frontier experiences. At a general level, the fundamental codes of culture-"those governing its language, its schemas of perception, its exchanges, its techniques, its values, the hierarchy of its practices"-evolved during this formative period.^[1] Still, to speak of a distinctive or unique Sonoran norteño identity proves difficult. Most settlements in this period constituted isolated entities, between which little personal contact occurred. Thus, not just one Sonoran identity existed, but rather multiple identities coexisted. Parallel to the Mexican society, the indigenous people, mainly Yaqui and Mayos, maintained their own identity.

Still, within these isolated communities, Sonora's small close-knit European and mestizo populations demonstrated a strong sense of regional loyalty and accentuated their distinctiveness.^[2] The symbols of this Sonoran identity, or what Benedict Anderson characterized as the artifacts of an "imagined community," found expression in popular folklore, music, political lore, and myths.^[3] Struggles against enemies, real or mythical, reinforced this frame of mind. The indigenous population, in particular the Apaches and the Yaquis, provided the "other" against which Sonorans initially defined their identity.

By the 1850s, conflict with foreigners, especially recurring attacks by filibusters, and neglect by the federal government reinforced the issue of resistance and identity. Those in power skillfully manipulated historic events and figures. The proselytizing of the Jesuit Eusebio Kino, the exploits of the defenders of Guaymas and Caborca against foreign intruders, and the deeds of the Yaqui leader José María Leyva Cajeme acquired symbolic importance, becoming identified with the Sonorense image. Linked to the accomplishment of Sonorans during the revolution, these events and the broader issues they represented evolved into the popular norteño folklore that flourished in the twentieth century.

Stereotypes concerning the Sonoran norteño abound throughout Mexico. One popular image of the norteño which pervades popular folklore is that of a tall güero (light-skinned), wearing an estetson (stetson) cowboy hat, blue jeans, denim shirts, metal belt buckle, and leather boots.^[4] On festive occasions, they consume large amounts of

carne asada (grilled beef), flour tortillas (not corn), frijoles con queso (beans with cheese), and beer. Unlike their Mexican counterparts, the norteño is perceived, according to Mexican intellectuals, "as less complicated . . . clearer and more direct, with simpler manners and less affability, but much more practical, enterprising and efficient."^[5] Resistance to "the absolute authority" of the federal government has earned them the reputation of political dissenters. These depictions, however, are typically penned by urban writers hoping to recapture an imagined bygone past. A marked difference existed between popular portrayals of norteños and the daily life of most Sonorans. Romanticized depictions of light-skinned, free-spirited norteños as "self made persons" do not conform to the reality confronted by most northerners.^[6] Life in the north remained precarious, and although land was available, countless Sonorans and indigenous people survived as indebted laborers on haciendas and cattle ranches.

Still, Sonora's hacendados, unlike their Chihuahuan counterparts, did not monopolize all productive land. A small class of rancheros managed to eke out a precarious existence cultivating wheat and raising cattle. Merchants from Guaymas and Hermosillo, who exported flour to Sinaloa and Baja California, eagerly purchased crops from both hacendados and rancheros.^[7] A close-knit group of notable families dominated politics and monopolized trade with Europe,^[8] and although independence from Spain displaced the role of the old colonial metropolis, it did little to alter the nascent export economy.^[9] Distance from central Mexico, aggravated by the lack of reliable overland routes, accentuated reliance on foreign commerce. With a relatively small population base, internal markets remained fragile. Confronted by fluctuating world prices for minerals and by civil unrest, Sonora faced repeated economic crisis. Decades of frontier isolation, government neglect, and economic stagnation heightened local elites' determination to forge closer commercial ties with foreigners, particularly North Americans.

The Border

The Mexican-American War and the Gadsden Purchase redrew international boundaries but did not produce immediate contact between Mexicans and Americans. Unlike areas along the Río Grande between Texas and Chihuahua, no population centers existed along the future border between Arizona and Sonora.^[10] Not until the mid-1850s did

small numbers of Anglo-Americans trickle into the Arizona-Sonora border region in search of mining opportunities. Border interaction reflected politics and power relations. The initial contact between Mexicans and Americans produced a clash of cultures which deteriorated into open racial conflict and scarred future relations. During this period, Sonora maintained certain key advantages over the new American territory. Arizona remained isolated from American commercial centers and relied on Mexican merchants and hacendados for basic goods. The components of a border economy evolved at a time when no settlements existed along the boundary between both countries.

During the 1870s, a flood of published accounts, written by both Mexicans and foreigners, promoted Sonora's mineral wealth and attracted large numbers of North Americans and Europeans to the "new border empire." As the railroad reached the American territory from California in 1877 and the Anglo population of Arizona increased, the early commercial advantages enjoyed by Sonoran business faded.^[11] Arizona's absorption by West Coast commercial centers forced the Sonoran economy to undergo the first of many adaptations. A new cash economy controlled by the Americans displaced the credit system that the Europeans had employed for decades. Sonoran merchants gradually deserted traditional suppliers in France, Germany, and England and forged alliances with business interests in San Francisco.

Mining and the potential for trade with the Pacific inspired projects for building a railroad in Sonora. Facing recurring wars with Indians, political strife, the lack of financing, and the absence of American rail lines, these early railroad schemes never materialized. By the late 1870s, as these tensions lessened, the federal government approved several plans to link Sonora to Arizona. The railroad symbolized the impending changes the state confronted and it generated heated debates over the future of Sonora's culture and identity. Divergent economic interests invariably masked the rhetoric concerning railroad projects. Sonorans who feared that their state would be absorbed by the "colossus of the north" vigorously protested against the concessions offered to foreigners. Other Sonorans viewed the railroad as an agent of modernization and labeled opponents of the project as retrograde.

Promoters of free trade with the United States dominated politics and carried the day. With the railroad in place, Americans invested in mining enterprises throughout the state, and many Sonoran elites, functioning largely as middlemen, profited from the expanding relationship

with those investors. Integration of the Sonoran economy by Arizona quickened the pace of social change. Besides fueling an export economy, the railroad consolidated the local economy and brought Sonorans from throughout the state face to face with each other. This encounter initiated fundamental changes and adaptations in nearly all spheres of social and political life.

The most profound modifications in the northwest occurred in the new border towns, such as Ambos Nogales, which developed in response to commerce between Sonora and Arizona. Ambos Nogales grew simultaneously, giving rise to a economic interdependence between the United States and the Mexican community. The absence of existing border settlements with established urban traditions and cultural practices facilitated greater exchange between both communities. Since Americans relied on Mexican commerce, relations between Ambos Nogales in this early period did not reflect the marked asymmetry found elsewhere in the Mexican north. To prosper in the new border environment, some enlightened Americans adapted Mexican cultural norms, learned Spanish, and interacted socially with their southern neighbors. In contrast to developments along the Texas-Chihuahua border, Sonoran and Arizonan business groups forged a working consensus and attempted to minimize open conflict and economic competition.^[12] The Mexican revolution strained, but did not derail, the economic and social rapport operating between business groups in Nogales.

Despite this consensus, elites from both countries had only limited success in imposing their vision of peaceful coexistence on the population. The influx of immigrants, both Americans and Mexicans, repeatedly threatened the tenuous peace which elites established between Ambos Nogales. Border relations are not unilinear but, rather, embody many different and distinct layers, shared by diverse groups of individuals, in which conflict and convergence actually coexist. Viewed from this perspective, border culture does not represent a uniform concept shared by all border residents, but instead, has definite meaning only to specific groups. There is a culture shared by business interests, both Mexican and American, one by long-term residents, one by Mexicans immigrants, and one by indigenous groups such as Yaquis and Tohono O'odhams (formerly called Papagos) who may have roots in both Arizona and Sonora. Fueled by ongoing immigration, social interaction, and economic growth, border society continuously evolved. Border interaction produced a complex cultural layering in which Americans and

Mexicans acquired the knowledge and ability to function effectively in each others' world. Crass mimicking of American culture did occur, particularly among Mexican upper classes, but in general both groups preserved their past traditions. Ambos Nogales experienced a process of internationalization but did not produce a bifurcated culture which operated independently of either Mexico or the United States.^[13]

Border interaction, exposure to the "other," did bring the issue of identity into sharper relief. Mexican identity, however, was not forged only in relation to the American. Conflict alone does not capture the complex web of social, economic, interpersonal, and familial relations which arose between border communities. Neither does it capture the dynamics of a Mexican population that lived on both sides of the border nor that of individuals-Mexicans and Americans-who maintained social ties and economic interests in both nations and thus sought to mitigate conflict when it erupted.

In the developing mining enclaves of rural Sonora, such as La Colorada and Minas Prietas, little parity existed between North Americans and Mexicans. In these areas, the absence of previous Mexican settlements proved advantageous to American economic interests. Offering comparatively high wages, mining centers became magnets for a diverse population and gave rise to a new working class composed of Yaquis and Sonorans. Accommodating Mexican officials allowed foreign mining companies a free hand in regulating the settlements, in controlling labor, and in exploiting natural resources. Sonoran land owners, merchants, and government officials profited from their relationship with foreign interests. A racial and social hierarchy permeated life in both the mines and the settlements. Confronting a host of dilemmas, including labor strife, ethnic discrimination, violence, and conflicting cultural values, mining towns embodied the full range of problems facing Sonora's Porfirian leaders.

During the nineteenth century, the northwest also served as a meeting ground for Mexicans from different parts of the country. Jalisences, Michoacanos, Guanajuatenses, and others migrated to the mines, haciendas and border towns of the north searching for work. These movements of people exposed northerners to the broad ethnic, cultural, and regional diversity of Mexico and began to redefine concepts of regional and national identity. Such diverse cultural exchanges were not easily replicated until the onset of the revolution. At one level the border divided two countries, yet at another level, it brought together mem-

bers of the same nation. The appearance of Mexicans from other states added yet another layer of complexity to border society.

Buoyed by their new-found status, Mexican elites transformed their urban environment, accentuating social differences with the rest of the population. Domingo Sarmiento's classic struggle between barbarism and civilization played itself out in Sonora between the rising urban classes of Hermosillo and Guaymas, which directly benefited from increased economic relations with the United States, and the common folk, the rancheros, the miners, and the Yaquis.^[14] The enthusiasm expressed by elites and middle sectors masked the serious problems that Sonora confronted. Precipitated by fluctuations in the price of silver and copper, recurring economic crisis throughout the nineteenth century exposed the fragility of the Sonoran economy. After the 1907 crisis, the promise of development became increasingly illusory-as the mines closed, as merchants' sales plummeted, and as agriculture declined, old social cleavages acquired new importance. The foreign presence, which included Americans, Europeans, and significant numbers of Asians, became a source of conflict.^[15] Spurred by the preferential treatment that the Porfiriato afforded foreigners, old concerns regarding culture and identity resurfaced. Nationalism assumed multiple characteristics and was not defined only by physical attacks on foreigners or their property.^[16] Demands by workers over wage inequity, protests by local municipios over the loss of autonomy; and even middle-class alarm over morality, embodied these nationalist concerns.

Regional inequality and intercity strife compounded rising class antagonisms, moralistic proclivities, racial prejudices, and nationalistic fervor. Local Porfirian officials proved incapable of responding to the growing discontent among disgruntled hacendados, middle classes, and labor. Facing mounting economic problems and the potential for social rebellion. pragmatic northern business interests and middle classes gradually withdrew their support for the Porfirian state. The foundations of a binational economic order were firmly in place. Norteño elites no longer needed the old regime to maintain the prosperous border economy, and the political turmoil that followed did not alter the basic economic and social tenets of this society.

Muchos Mexicos: El Norte

The notion of "many Mexicos" encompasses not only Mexico's complex geography, but also embodies a multitude of human experiences

including complex interactions between race, ethnicity, and gender and structural relations such as the nature of economic exchange, land-tenure systems, and methods of labor exploitation.^[17] Under certain circumstances, these conditions coalesce and find expression in unique regional experiences. Yet these differences are not always absolute, and distinct regions, such as the north, share similarities with other states in Mexico. At one level, Sonoran economic development parallels the general transformation of the Mexican north during the Porfiriato.^[18] American investments in mining and railroads also produced change in Chihuahua, Coahuila, Tamaulipas, and Nuevo León.^[19] The various regions of the Mexican north shared similar forms of economic development, and American customs also penetrated these regions,^[20] but how the Mexican north adapted to external pressures, whether American or Mexican, varied from region to region. Specific historic conditions and the context in which they arose produced important variances. The north by no means experienced uniform patterns of development. As the late Mexican anthropologist Guillermo Bonfil Batalla pointed out, "the rural culture of Sonora was not the same as that of Nuevo León."^[21] Common patterns of economic development did not mitigate disparities in communication, in population size, in conflict with the indigenous, in control of land, in political alliances, and in the strength of regional elites. In many cases, the interplay between these factors determined how areas responded to economic and cultural pressures from the United States.^[22]

Physical separation from other Mexican states and immediate contiguity with the United States distinguished Sonoran development from the general pattern in the north.^[23] The early world of the Sonoran remained constrained by the foreboding Sierra Madre Occidental and by recurring attacks from the dreaded Apaches on its eastern flank and from the formidable Yaquis to the south. The mountains, which encircled the state, and the frequent Indian wars acquired symbolic dimensions, placing tangible spatial limits on Sonoran society.^[24] Isolation influenced the nature of politics in the region. During the colonial era, Sonora was relegated, along with Sinaloa, Durango, and Baja California, to the status of a provincia interna. Following independence, the Mexican congress united Sonora and Sinaloa into El Estado de Occidente .^[25] This isolation, according to Stuart Voss, repeatedly undermined the economic and political plans of the Sonora's notables.^[26] Unable to overcome these obstacles, the union collapsed in 1831. Torn by civil war, Mexico City paid scant attention to the north.

Before the Porfiriato, Sonora seldom intruded into Mexican national life.^[27] Ignacio Zuñiga, an influential Sonoran statesman, believed that Mexican political leaders had a greater degree of familiarity with the problems of Central America and Cuba than with his state. In 1842 Zúñiga wrote that "Sonorans have not found any sympathy among the sensible and humane inhabitants of the capital [Mexico City]."^[28] Forty years later, when Sonoran congressman José Patricio Nicoli arrived in Mexico City, he discovered that fellow representatives still knew little about his native state.^[29] In the first decade of the Porfiriato, political leaders lamented that Europeans and North Americans knew Sonora better than most Mexicans did.^[30]

While Sonora remained physically isolated, other northern Mexican states established, according to Mexican geographer Jesús Galindo y Villa, "good communications with Chihuahua and with the rest of the nation."^[31] This process allowed the north and northeast to develop varying degrees of economic, political, and even social ties with the central region.^[32] The Sánchez Navarros of Coahuila maintained a lucrative business selling sheep in Mexico City. Family members regularly visited the capital and participated in the politics and social life of the city.^[33] Long before the border with the United States acquired importance, economic interests in the Mexican north and northeast had established relations with the south.^[34]

No one family dominated land or economic activity in Sonora as they did in Chihuahua, where the Terrazas clan's monopolization of land and mining allowed them to extract concessions from the central government and foreign interests.^[35] Similar patterns existed in Coahuila, where the Sánchez Navarro family had controlled extensive tracts of land.^[36] In both cases, access to markets in central Mexico stimulated early acquisition of land and the development of cattle- and sheep-ranching. Removed from markets, property in pre-border Sonora did not attain the value it did elsewhere in the Mexican north: pronounced isolation in the northwest exacerbated Sonora's long-term political and economic problems.^[37]

While the Sonoran economy languished through much of the nineteenth century, Monterrey, the capital of Nuevo León, slowly emerged as an important commercial center in the northeast. The absence of geographic barriers in northeastern Mexico permitted Monterrey greater economic and social interaction with the surrounding area. Unlike their Sonoran counterparts, who remained fragmented, Monterrey

elites took advantage of the emerging opportunities, adeptly forging familial and political alliances. With caudillo Santiago Vidaurri at the helm, Monterrey became the hub of a extensive regional economy.^[38] Increased trade during the American Civil War brought in much-needed capital. With access to ports in Tamaulipas and to American markets in the north, Monterrey developed extensive commercial relations with the surrounding states of Chihuahua and Coahuila and with areas as far south as Durango, Zacatecas, and San Luis Potosí.^[39]

Economic groups in Sinaloa, in particular those in the port of Mazatlán, also became an important obstacle to the southern expansion of Sonoran commercial interests. Despite its rocky and inhospitable harbor, Mazatlán had access to diverse markets in the interior such as Durango, Colima, Chihuahua, and Jalisco. Aside from precious metals, foreign ships loaded a wide variety of agricultural products from these areas. With the arrival of Chinese, British, German, and American vessels, Mazatlán became the principal commercial entrepôt of the Mexican Pacific northwest. By 1842 Mazatláan also served as headquarters for several powerful German merchant houses.^[40]

Guaymas, Sonora's principal port, lived in the shadow of the Mazatlán. Its location in the Gulf of California proved disadvantageous in the new order that emerged in the Mexican northwest. The principal attraction Sonora offered continued to be access to silver and other minerals. Silver, however, remained an unpredictable commodity. Its price constantly fluctuated on international markets, thereby leaving Sonora vulnerable to repeated economic crisis throughout the nineteenth century. As silver prices once again plummeted in the 1850s, José Velasco, a noted political figure, lamented that "trade in exports remained precarious, we lack products for returning ships, the only thing Sonora has to offer now is flour."^[41] To develop its own economy, Sonora had to increase the export of minerals and develop trade relations with the north, but outside of the orbit of Mazatlán merchants.

By the mid-1880s most of the Mexican north and northeast, including the states of Chihuahua, Coahuila, and Nuevo León, had rail or other access to markets in central Mexico. Increased economic and social interaction between these states and central Mexico provided them a measure of autonomy from the United States, and while elites in these regions welcomed relations with the United States, they did not forsake trade with other Mexican states. In cases when the United States adopted restrictive trade measures, rail access to the south allowed mer-

chants and hacendados in Chihuahua and Monterrey to reach alternative markets; for example, to circumvent the United States' restrictions on Mexican beef in 1892, Luis Terrazas and other cattle producers found outlets for their livestock in Mexico City.^[42]

With no rail links to the south and with limited access to other Mexican markets, Sonoran agricultural and mineral production grew increasingly dependent on the United States. Writing in the 1890s, Alfonso Luis Velasco explained that geographic isolation had forced Sonora to limit its "commerce with the western United States of which it is a real dependency and the states of Sinaloa, Chihuahua and the territory of Baja California."^[43] Expanded economic activity, as Ramón Ruiz demonstrated, increased Sonora's reliance on the United States.^[44]

Reliance on exports further magnified foreign influences in Sonora. Most elites relied on precarious mining operations and the export of wheat to neighboring Sinaloa to generate capital,^[45] and the advent of economic relations with the United States intensified this orientation. As foreign capital penetrated the state, Sonoran elites increasingly functioned as intermediaries. American and British interests dominated the largest mining enterprises and the railroads, and Sonoran notables found themselves relegated to agriculture, cattle, and limited trade. Pronounced reliance on American investments and markets eventually produced unexpected and dramatic cultural changes in Sonoran society.

In contrast, elites in Nuevo León achieved significant independent expansion without becoming wholly dependent on the infusion of United States capital.^[46] In Chihuahua, as Mark Wasserman observed, Luis Terrazas avoided outright subordination to foreigners and exercised a near total monopoly on the politics and the economy of the state.^[47] This was not the case in Sonora. Constrained geographically and fragmented politically, Sonoran elites remained divided. Regional antagonisms between Alamos, Guaymas, and Hermosillo masked economic and political differences among local elites.^[48] In many respects, Sonoran upper classes resembled the weaker Californio elites during the Mexican era rather than their more powerful northern counterparts.^[49]

Beside economic competition from neighboring states, Sonora also faced serious internal contradictions. While most of Mexico lived at peace with its indigenous population, a persistent state of war with the Yaquis and Apaches continued to foment turmoil in Sonora.^[50] Sonoran elites viewed the Indians as a retrograde force and the principal cause of the states' inability to develop. By the mid-1880s other north-

ern Mexican regions had come to terms with the indigenous populations, whereas in Sonora, wars with Yaquis provided opportunities for ambitious military officers and corrupt politicians to advance their careers but continually squandered state resources.

Intense political factionalism further divided Sonorans, adding to the uncertainty of life in the northwest. The insecurity of life prompted many Sonorenses to look for opportunities in California and Arizona. This constant out-migration of laborers severely depleted the local population. As the second largest state in Mexico, Sonora remained seriously underpopulated-a condition that prevented the creation of a stable labor force and limited the formation of internal markets. With the exception of the territory of Baja California, it had the smallest population of all the northern states. In 1888, its population lagged at 150,391, whereas neighboring Chihuahua had 298,073 and Nuevo León 244,052.^[51]

A recurrent pattern of social and political strife prevented local elites from effectively consolidating power. After the French intervention, officials in Mexico City moved to integrate the north in order to stabilize relations with the United States. The presidency of Lerdo de Tejada marked the beginning of the region's slow and arduous integration into the Mexican political mainstream.^[52] Lerdo established federal control over economic policy and international relations, vetoing several foreign plans to build railroads in the northwest. A rebellion against longtime caudillo Ignacio Pesqueira, led by a coalition of mine owners, merchants, and urban middle class, gave Lerdo the opportunity to intervene in state politics. He supported the ouster of Ignacio Pesqueira and in 1876 appointed General Vicente Mariscal as military governor of Sonora. A small contingent of federal troops helped ensure the new order in the state.

Pesqueira's ouster facilitated efforts by the central government to manipulate events in the state. Historically, the federal government's ability to influence events in most northern states had been limited by the presence of strong local elites. President Benito Juárez struggled to break the power of Governor Santiago Vidaurri in the northeast.^[53] In Chihuahua, General Porfirio Díaz negotiated with Governor Luis Terrazas in order to reach a workable compromise between federal and state interest. Instead, among those who had rebelled against Pesqueira, Díaz found a sympathetic group who shared his agenda. The relationship proved beneficial to both groups: Díaz needed strong allies in the

region to ensure his control of politics, and the "young turks" who assumed power needed the support of the federal government to deflect local opposition. The relationship between this group and the Díaz administration embodied multiple levels of patronage and clientelism, which were replicated at the national, regional, and local levels.

Shortly after arriving in Sonora, Díaz's emissary, General José Guillermo Carbó, received a letter from General Manuel González instructing him to make sure that the new leaders of Sonora belong in "body and soul to our party."^[54] A triumvirate composed of Luis E. Torres, Ramón Corral, and Rafael Izábal accommodated the demands of the Porfirian regime. Torres often referred to Carbó as the benefactor of the Sonoran triumvirate.^[55] Supported by Carbó, they orchestrated a rebellion against Mariscal, the popular interim governor appointed by Lerdo.^[56] Unlike former political factions, which governed with varying degrees of autonomy, the triumvirates' control of the state increasingly rested on the military and political support of the federal government.

As commander of the federal troops for northwest Mexico, Carbó often played a decisive role in local affairs. Politically astute, he warned Díaz never to appoint Mexicans from other states to fill important offices in Sonora.^[57] To appease the general, Corral found himself forced to shuffle nominees from district to district prior to an election in 1883. Following Carbó's example, Corral insisted that the new legislature would include "our most trusted friends, those we judge to be loyal and energetic."^[58] Until his death in October 1885, Carbó oversaw a political machine which included Sinaloa, Sonora, and Baja California. Afterward, Díaz dealt directly with Torres, and later with Corral.

Each member of the Sonoran triumvirate played a specific role in the new government. Torres, a native of Chihuahua and a military figure, exhibited a strongly pragmatic orientation.^[59] He had been an early supporter of Díaz, endorsing the Plan de Noria and, later, Tuxtepec. In a very candid letter to a trusted ally, José Negrete of Guaymas, Torres summarized the relationship between the three men.^[60] Torres portrayed himself as the senior member of the group, removed from the daily operations of the state, which he entrusted to Corral and Izàbal. In practice, he became the triumvirate's point man with the administration in Mexico City and a troubleshooter in the state. Díaz later used him in the same capacity, assigning him as political boss to Baja California and later as military emissary in Yucatán. Corral, a native of Alamos, became the intellectual architect of the group. As secretary of state and

later governor, he authored numerous laws, restructured the educational system, and worked to attract foreign investments. In the process he acquired an immense personal fortune. Born in Sinaloa, Izábal, the least member of the group, functioned as a political operative in the state legislature, served as governor, and led bloody campaigns against the Yaquis and Seris. Beside politics, the three men became intimate personal friends, and Torres served as godfather in both Corral and Izábal's weddings. Beyond this inner circle, the triumvirate established a network of patronage which included merchants, hacendados, and government functionaries throughout the state. Marriage into notable families and extended family relations cemented ties within this broader alliance.

The Sonoran triumvirate relied on Carbó and the federal government to neutralize political opponents. In 1882, when governor Carlos Ortiz, an ally of the triumvirate in the ouster of Mariscal, pursued an independent course, they plotted his removal. From Mazatlán, Carbó coordinated the plan against Ortiz. While Corral and Izábal stayed behind to build political support, Carbó dispatched Torres to Mexico City to win over Díaz. Ortiz tried unsuccessfully to woo Díaz by lobbying the influential Minister of the Public Works Carlos Pacheco.^[61] Under Ortiz's direction, the official government press repeatedly denounced Carbó's interference in the internal affairs of Sonora.^[62] Ortiz's mistakes in dealings with the Apaches and Yaquis, his educational reforms, and his attempts to reorganize the state militia played into the hands of the opposition. Bernardo Reyes, commander of federal troops in Sonora, openly clashed with Ortiz over a purported Yaqui rebellion.^[63] Political pressure and a well-staged "mutiny" by federal troops in Sonora evenrually forced Ortiz to leave the state. Summarizing his efforts to Izábal, Carbó indicated that "the work of Luis in Mexico combined with the help that I lent from here tilted the balance in our favor. We were fortunate that our interest happened to coincide with the interest of the center. . . . otherwise it is difficult to get them to notice Sonora since it is such a distant state."^[64]

Despite repeated electoral challenges, the triumvirate composed of Torres, Corral, and Izábal managed to control the destiny of Sonora until 1911. Support for the Sonoran triumvirate did not, however, embody broader ideological unity, but rather immediate self interest. A coalition of elites and political interest agreed on the need to eliminate the Apache and Yaqui threat, create a stable political climate and at

tract United States investors. Except for the issue of the Yaquis, these goals had been largely accomplished by 1900. The absence of broader ideological cohesion fueled an active multiclass opposition.

The rise of Díaz coincided with expanded economic ties between Sonora and the United States. Sonora found itself pulled in two directions; political absorption by Mexico City and economic integration by the United States. Beside economic control by the United States, Sonora gradually relinquished political autonomy to Mexico City. For local elites, economic expansion and prosperity produced by increased relations with the north made stronger ties with Mexico palatable. Even before the 1850s, the presence of Yankees in these areas excited many Sonoran notables who hoped that commercial ties with the north would allow the state to emerge as a powerhouse in the northwest. Ultimately, the border embodied both the promise and peril of closer relations with the United States.