Mormons settle Baja California and not Utah, effects on Mexican history?

[Zioneer]

So I've long had a TL idea in my head of Mormons settling permanently in Baja California in Mexico instead of the slice of Mexico that soon became the Utah Territory.

I'm not so concerned with how they get there as what would be the butterflies and effects on Mexican history once they do. If the Mormons settle in OTL Tijuana, or even further away from the border in Baja, and quickly build up their population as they did in Utah, are there any major conflicts they could get involved in? Assuming unlike the Texans they have no interest in being annexed by the United States (and there's evidence that even in OTL Utah they were dismayed in becoming Americans again), what events could they influence?

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

Could mid 19th Century Baja California support a similar migrant population as Utah?

 

[Skallagrim]

Well, the state of Baja California (the northern half of the peninsula) has a larger population than Utah nowadays, but a quick look on wiki tells me that this only happened in the 1990s. It would appear that Baja California Sur was historically the more populous area: the census figure from 1895 (for the unitied peninsula) is 42,875 inhabitants. In 1900, census figures tell us there were 7,583 people in the northern part, and 40,041 in the southern part. The southern part, Baja California Sur, only saw very slow population growth after that, though-- not exceeding 100,000 souls until the 1960s. (The northern part, conversely, was well past half a million inhabitants by that same decade.)

All in all, I'd say that given the low OTL population in the northern part of the peninsula, combined with the evident historical capacity to support a growing population, a Mormon migration into the region might theoretically result in success. If they don't get in the way of US interests, then the USA may be interested in backing the Mormon state as a buffer against Mexico. (There's less reason for the USA to directly grab Baja California, especially when it's full of Mormons. Having a friendly country as a buffer, while also having a nice place to ah, 're-direct' any bothersome Mormons to... might appeal to the USA.)

 

[Nivek]

Mormons Will tan into troubles Even faster, catholics might not like that bizarre cult as they call them at all

 

[Oxander]

Mormons Will tan into troubles Even faster, catholics might not like that bizarre cult as they call them at all

Central and South America - Catholic-heavy places - contribute a huge percentage of Mormon converts.

This is outdated, from the 1980s, but still.

 

[Von_Schlieffen]

Should the Mormons survive the Catholics then Baja will become a US state most likely as America would like to manifest even more destiny and a minority of Americans that cried out for annexation would be the perfect pretext for annexation.

 

[GorillaTheater]

Central and South America - Catholic-heavy places - contribute a huge percentage of Mormon converts.

All the more reason for the Church leadership in Mexico to give short shrift to these Anglos.

 

[Nivek]

Central and South America - Catholic-heavy places - contribute a huge percentage of Mormon converts.

View attachment 443332
This is outdated, from the 1980s, but still.

80's is not 19th Century, people were far more religious back there and EAS before the worst excess and Sins if the priest become public( they always exist but mass media Made them force to accept reality) plus México was pretty religiously catholic...that Will be fun...

 

[FillyofDelphi]

80's is not 19th Century, people were far more religious back there and EAS before the worst excess and Sins if the priest become public( they always exist but mass media Made them force to accept reality) plus México was pretty religiously catholic...that Will be fun...

Well, to be fair this is the mid-19th century and there's some real debates over how much influence and authority the Church should have in Mexican life, so the powers that be among the Liberals/Dencenteralists might not be too annoyed if the LDS knocks the priests down a peg or two, and they're the ones in charge up in these areas. However, that's based on wanting a more secular society in general and splitting the Church from the State, which dosen't fit ery well with the Mormon social structure. If the Mormons want to avoid getting cracked down on, they're going to have to alter their culture to accomidate a less insular operation... which has huge impacts. On the other hand, if Mexico tries to push them down they might attempt to get the US to step in to take over the region as a Territory where they could run the show...

 

[Lusitania]

The ability of the Mormons to survive and establish themselves was based on their location. Being located on the peripheral of Mexican claimed North America and the American claims North American. Moving right smack into the middle of the Mexico would of brought them directly into the path of Mexican church and government.

Also I keep reading they moved to Mexico in the middle of 19th century. But no it was in the earlier part of the 19th century since Mormons participated in the US-Mexican war.

 

[Zioneer]

The ability of the Mormons to survive and establish themselves was based on their location. Being located on the peripheral of Mexican claimed North America and the American claims North American. Moving right smack into the middle of the Mexico would of brought them directly into the path of Mexican church and government.

Also I keep reading they moved to Mexico in the middle of 19th century. But no it was in the earlier part of the 19th century since Mormons participated in the US-Mexican war.

Specifically, Mormons settled in Utah when it was still part of Alta California in July 1847. It had been captured but not formally annexed until 1848. You are correct that Mormons participated in the US-Mexican War.

My thought was if they had found Utah itself unsuitable for some reason (plague, famine, etc), and kept moving until they got to what is now OTL Northern Mexico. Baja California and Baja California Sur, Sonora, etc. In OTL, Mormons didn't settle there until the 1870s. By then they were fiercely American.

But what if they were in Mexico from the late 1840s, and didn't have a patriotic American attitude, but instead a patriotic Mexican attitude? That's what I'm asking.

 

[Skallagrim]

Also I keep reading they moved to Mexico in the middle of 19th century. But no it was in the earlier part of the 19th century since Mormons participated in the US-Mexican war.

The early Mormon pioneers did. The migration to Utah largely took place in the period 1846-1869 (the Mormons annually formed "travel companies" during that period). That rather counts as "middle of the nineteenth century".

 

[Lusitania]

Specifically, Mormons settled in Utah when it was still part of Alta California in July 1847. It had been captured but not formally annexed until 1848. You are correct that Mormons participated in the US-Mexican War.

My thought was if they had found Utah itself unsuitable for some reason (plague, famine, etc), and kept moving until they got to what is now OTL Northern Mexico. Baja California and Baja California Sur, Sonora, etc. In OTL, Mormons didn't settle there until the 1870s. By then they were fiercely American.

But what if they were in Mexico from the late 1840s, and didn't have a patriotic American attitude, but instead a patriotic Mexican attitude? That's what I'm asking.

That would of required a different Mexican mentality that would of also played differently in Texas war so we may not of had texas war end the way it did. Would Mormons agree to speak Spanish if they were allowed to keep religion. If so they move into Central Teas valley displacing Americans would of been interesting.

 

[Zioneer]

That would of required a different Mexican mentality that would of also played differently in Texas war so we may not of had texas war end the way it did. Would Mormons agree to speak Spanish if they were allowed to keep religion. If so they move into Central Teas valley displacing Americans would of been interesting.

Well, I don't plan to have the Mormons settle in Texas, so that's not at dispute. I do agree that the Mexican government might see these new Anglos as a second Texas, but unlike the Texans, the Mormons are feeling oppression and have no motivation to annex themselves back to the country that pushed them out of Illinois and Missouri and murdered their first leader.

I think Mormons would agree to speak Spanish if asked, though I'm not sure it would be asked of them.

 

[DTF955Baseballfan]

If the Mormons begin to enter the area when it was still Mexico, I wonder if that means they would have gone further south if the area was part of the USA.

For instance, suppose an American war against Spain leads to a treaty where the United States gets Texas and eventually buys land above a certain parallel so that it stretches to the Pacific, let's say just so they can get the San Francisco Bay.

If that is the case, does that mean that the Mormons choose to move into let's say the Santa Fe area or even further into Baja like the original post asks?

I don't really get into how much the United States expanded to the West Coast in my timeline about Jefferson winning in 1796, but war with Spain does resolve and something like that does happen.

 

[Lusitania]

Well, I don't plan to have the Mormons settle in Texas, so that's not at dispute. I do agree that the Mexican government might see these new Anglos as a second Texas, but unlike the Texans, the Mormons are feeling oppression and have no motivation to annex themselves back to the country that pushed them out of Illinois and Missouri and murdered their first leader.

I think Mormons would agree to speak Spanish if asked, though I'm not sure it would be asked of them.

Ok let’s look at things with this historical context.
1) Mexico looking to settle wild frontier land allows American settlers to settle in Texas. It was not in these settlers minds to automatically declare their independence from Mexico but they did with a decade or so
2) Texas war results in Americans rushing to Texas to fight Mexicans and Mexico looses Texas.

So why would Mexico let a whole bunch of disgruntle Americans move into the center of their country?

 

[Lusitania]

If the Mormons begin to enter the area when it was still Mexico, I wonder if that means they would have gone further south if the area was part of the USA.

For instance, suppose an American war against Spain leads to a treaty where the United States gets Texas and eventually buys land above a certain parallel so that it stretches to the Pacific, let's say just so they can get the San Francisco Bay.

If that is the case, does that mean that the Mormons choose to move into let's say the Santa Fe area or even further into Baja like the original post asks?

I don't really get into how much the United States expanded to the West Coast in my timeline about Jefferson winning in 1796, but war with Spain does resolve and something like that does happen.

USA was fighting Mexico, Spain had already been kicked to Cuba and Puerto Rico.

 

[DTF955Baseballfan]

USA was fighting Mexico, Spain had already been kicked to Cuba and Puerto Rico.

Sorry, I should have been more specific - I guess in my mind, the reference to the timeline was enough to imply the date.

Tghe U.S. and Spain hd tensions even OTL that could have led to war. In my timeline, war eodes occur, and with Spain preoccupied withNapoleon, the U.S> beats them - with a somewhat friendlier Britain there is no need to worry bout them, but U.S. victor over Spain would have been possible OTL, at least, given a few breaks.

SO, my point was that a treat might include the U.S. then buying Texas and also enough of New Spain to give it a land bridge to the Pacifidc, so they coud get the San Francisco Bay -with Spain needing the money and Mexico ready to revolt, they might figure that would be a fair deal after a defeat in war.

However, sucha deal would also already give the United States OTL Utah - or at least much of it - by the time the Mormons make their trek. (Indeed, even more land purchased in a different Adams-Onis Treaty would.

 

[Lusitania]

Sorry, I should have been more specific - I guess in my mind, the reference to the timeline was enough to imply the date.

Tghe U.S. and Spain hd tensions even OTL that could have led to war. In my timeline, war eodes occur, and with Spain preoccupied withNapoleon, the U.S> beats them - with a somewhat friendlier Britain there is no need to worry bout them, but U.S. victor over Spain would have been possible OTL, at least, given a few breaks.

SO, my point was that a treat might include the U.S. then buying Texas and also enough of New Spain to give it a land bridge to the Pacifidc, so they coud get the San Francisco Bay -with Spain needing the money and Mexico ready to revolt, they might figure that would be a fair deal after a defeat in war.

However, sucha deal would also already give the United States OTL Utah - or at least much of it - by the time the Mormons make their trek. (Indeed, even more land purchased in a different Adams-Onis Treaty would.

Yeah but that would only happen after the US bought French Louisiana which was smack in the middle. As for Spain selling its territory not going to work because the Spanish king was in prison and Napoleon had put his brother on the throne of Spain but the Spanish colonies including New Spain not going tp recognize anything French Bonaparte agrees to. Also the American government had such a hard time getting the $$ approved for the French purchase don't see it happening for the Spanish. The US was not in a position to project power that far west till after the 1830s. You forget the war of 1812 the British would swallow up California and Texas. Plus during the war they prevent the US from paying Spain / France. Sorry but diplomatic and timing is off.

 

[Zioneer]

If the Mormons begin to enter the area when it was still Mexico, I wonder if that means they would have gone further south if the area was part of the USA.

For instance, suppose an American war against Spain leads to a treaty where the United States gets Texas and eventually buys land above a certain parallel so that it stretches to the Pacific, let's say just so they can get the San Francisco Bay.

If that is the case, does that mean that the Mormons choose to move into let's say the Santa Fe area or even further into Baja like the original post asks?

I don't really get into how much the United States expanded to the West Coast in my timeline about Jefferson winning in 1796, but war with Spain does resolve and something like that does happen.

I don't think I've articulated myself clearly, so I'll try again.

My initial PoD is this: more or less, the Mexican-American War goes as OTL, maybe takes a couple weeks longer without the Mormons to scout out certain areas (as the Mormon Battalion did during the war). The Mormons take a different route, and just so happen to be outside the area carved out from Mexico by the victorious Americans. Except for the OTL Utah War, they're in their most anti-American mood at this point, so they wouldn't want to annex themselves to America.