Karan Bhasin - 2021 Near Scholar by The Harker School

2020-21 JOHN NEAR GRANT Recipient Marriage of Cultures: The Construction of Punjabi-Mexican Ethnic Identity in Twentieth-Century California Karan Bhasin

Marriage of Cultures: The Construction of Punjabi-Mexican Ethnic Identity in Twentieth-Century California

Karan Bhasin 2021 John Near Scholar Mentors: Mr. Mark Janda, Ms. Karen Haley, Ms. Amy Pelman April 14, 2021

Bhasin 2

At first glance, Rasul’s El Ranchero seems inconspicuous: another family-run roadside taqueria located in the heart of California’s Yuba City. But in 1977, the restaurant broadcast an advertisement with a uniquely paradoxical, yet telling slogan: “Mexican Food Specializing in East Indian Food.”1 Inside El Ranchero, the quesadillas are prepared with rotis, not flour tortillas, and the chile verde with beef, not pork.2 The restaurant, which served customers for four decades in the second half of the twentieth century, is representative of a forgotten chapter of United States’ history.3 Decades prior to the opening of El Ranchero, early twentieth-century California was undergoing a period of rapid and substantial agricultural development.4 This growth was largely the result of successful efforts to irrigate California’s Imperial Valley by diversion of water from the Colorado River in the century’s opening decade.5 This feat was described in a 1921 poem by an Imperial Valley bank manager as “the key which has unlocked this reincarnation of the Garden of Eden.”6 During this time frame, Punjab, a province in northwestern India, was experiencing its own period of modernization, one that caused many workers to lose their jobs.7 Thousands of members of the Sikh religious group, concentrated in Punjab, migrated to California in search of

Sonia Chopra, “California’s Lost (and Found) Punjabi-Mexican Cuisine,” Eater, last modified April 23, 2019.

“Examining Latino and Punjabi Sikh Identity,” Journeys at Dartmouth; Chopra, “California’s Lost,” Eater.

Benjamin Gottlieb, “Punjabi Sikh-Mexican American community fading into history,” The Washington Post, last modified August 13, 2012. 3

Huping Ling and Allan W. Austin, “The Indian American Experience: History and Culture,” in Asian American History and Culture: An Encyclopedia (London: Routledge, 2015), 312. 4

Benny J. Andres, Power and Control in the Imperial Valley: Nature, Agribusiness, and Workers on the California Borderland, 1900-1940 (College Station: Texas A & M University Press, 2016), 17, 42. 6

J. Andres, Power and Control, 3-4.

Ling and Austin, “The Indian,” 311.

Bhasin 3

employment.8 Concurrently, the 1910 Mexican Revolution begot an era of domestic disorder and violence.9 The ensuing chaos, lasting until 1920, drove citizens to flee the nation.10 California, due to its proximity, sense of security, educational and working opportunities, and burgeoning agricultural economy, was an attractive destination.11 Over half a million Mexicans immigrated to the United States between 1899 and 1928, resulting in a Mexican population of over 170,000 in southern California by 1930.12 The two distinct ethnic groups would soon cross paths and intermarry, culminating in the emergence of a unique Punjabi-Mexican community consisting of an estimated 500 unions.13 From 1913 to 1946 across California, Punjabi men married Mexican women at high rates: 47 percent of men chose Mexican women as spouses in Northern California, 76 percent in Central California, and 92 percent in Southern California.14 As a result of the legal and economic struggles experienced by Punjabi men in the United States, their marriages to Mexican women were often considered mere practical necessities arising from attempts to obtain land through marriage. To properly unravel the community’s roots, it is crucial to avoid this simplistic characterization. Early twentieth century marriages of Punjabi men and Mexican women in California were compatible unions due to shared cultural values and the effects of

Ling and Austin, 312.

Nicholas Villanueva, Sam W. Haynes, and Douglas W. Richmond, The Mexican Revolution: Conflict and Consolidation, 1910-1940 (College Station: Texas A & M University Press, 2013), 118-19. 10

Villanueva, Haynes, and Richmond, 119.

Villanueva, Haynes, and Richmond, 121.

Villanueva, Haynes, and Richmond, 118.

Jonathan H. X Lee, History of Asian Americans: Exploring Diverse Roots, enhanced credo edition ed. (Santa Barbara, CA: Greenwood, an imprint of ABC-CLIO, 2015), 75-76. 14

Lee, 75.

Bhasin 4

Americanization, rather than arrangements necessitated by anti-miscegenation laws and financial need. Asia to the United States: Immigration Patterns At the turn of the twentieth century, cheap Asian labor had long been central to California's farming economy. A homogeneous labor force, or one with less variation in race and ethnicity of its individuals, was maintained by a “succession of immigrant waves—Chinese, Japanese, Mexicans, Hindustanis, Filipinos.”15 This supply prevented an “equal distribution of income” by sustaining the continued exploitation of immigrant labor.16 Cultural stereotypes also played a considerable role: Asian immigrants were regarded as hard-working, resilient, reliable in paying off their debts, and generally profitable investments.17 Perceptions of these workers as socially withdrawn further promoted a standard of them as easily controllable.18 Together, these factors contributed to the perpetuation of “racialized, hierarchal agriculture,” wherein landowners sought out Asian labor.19 However, legal barriers, propelled by United States nativism, impeded Asian immigration to California. This struggle was not unique to early twentieth century Punjabi immigrants: Other groups previously bore the repercussions of similar legislation. The Chinese were excluded in 1882.20 Twenty-five years later, the Japanese were barred by the Gentleman’s Agreement in

Paul S. Taylor, “California Farm Labor: A Review,” Agricultural History 42, no. 1 (1968): 51, JSTOR.

Levi Varden Fuller, “The Supply of Agricultural Labor as a Factor in the Evolution of Farm Organization in California” (PhD diss., University of California, Berkeley, 1939 qtd in Paul S. Taylor, “California Farm Labor: A Review,” Agricultural History 42, no. 1 (1968): 51, JSTOR. 16

J. Andres, Power and Control, 71-72.

J. Andres, 78.

J. Andres, 69.

Huping Ling and Allan W. Austin, “The Chinese American Experience: History and Culture,” in Asian American History and Culture: An Encyclopedia (London: Routledge, 2015), 119. 20

Bhasin 5

1907.21 The 1917 Barred Zone Immigration Act halted almost all Asian immigration to the United States, save for Filipinos, who, like Mexicans, were still able to come and work in agriculture.22 The 1917 law also prevented previous South Asian immigrants from bringing their spouses to the United States.23 The pattern of limiting immigration can be attributed to xenophobic and racist sentiments, as well as Americans’ concerns over losing jobs and other opportunities. Officials feared that Indian immigrants would become public charges, or individuals who were dependent on government resources.24 Immigrants from India to the United States, mostly peasants from Punjab, were regarded as undesirable by the federal Immigration Commission due to their perceived “lack of personal cleanliness,” “low morals,” illiteracy, and incompatibility with or inability to assimilate under “American principles.”25 These misgivings served as grounds for severe restrictions on Indian immigration. The high rejection rate of Asian Indians who attempted to achieve naturalization demonstrated the degree of legal adversity they experienced. The rejection rate of Asian Indian applicants by the Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization rose from less than 10 percent to 28 percent in 1907, and to 50 percent by 1909.26 The 1923 Supreme Court ruling in United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind upheld legal discrimination against Indians in the United States by declaring

Huping Ling and Allan W. Austin, “The Japanese American Experience: History and Culture,” in Asian American History and Culture: An Encyclopedia (London: Routledge, 2015), 372. 21

Huping Ling and Allan W. Austin, “The Asian American Experience: History, Culture, and Scholarship,” in Asian American History and Culture: An Encyclopedia (London: Routledge, 2015), 32. 22

Gurinder Singh Mann, Paul David Numrich, and Raymond B. Williams, Buddhists, Hindus, and Sikhs in America (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), 126-27. Lawrence A. Wenzel, “The Rural Punjabis of California: A Religio-Ethnic Group,” Phylon (1960-) 29, no. 3 (1968): 250, JSTOR. 24

Karen Leonard, Making Ethnic Choices: California’s Punjabi Mexican Americans (Philadelphia PA: Temple University Press, 2010), 24 26

Leonard, 31.

Bhasin 6

they were not Caucasian, and therefore could not become citizens or own land.27 Punjabi immigrants also experienced discrimination that was not grounded in the American legal system. Some returned to their native land in response to harassment by the Asiatic Exclusion League.28 Companies and newspapers in the United States expressed concern over Punjabis immigrating to their country, mainly due to fears of losing jobs to immigrants and because of their “foreign” habits.29 These sentiments closely echoed those of officials whom advocated for legal barriers. The 1924 Immigration Act “established immigration quotas based upon the origin of the foreign-born population in 1890,” reinforcing the “virtual cessation of legal immigration from India.”30 This legislation included literacy tests and taxes to further restrict laborers from immigrating to the United States.31 Most immigrants who managed to come to the United States prior to this immigration law were men who were either single or who left their wives and children behind in their homeland. Thus, the overall ratios among Punjabi men and women became extremely skewed.32 As late as 1940, 460 males had immigrated for every 100 females, a trend that was not reversed until 1947, when more women were allowed to come from Punjab to the United States.33 Thus, the restrictive immigration laws made it exceedingly difficult for Punjabi men who had come alone to the United States to find Punjabi spouses. Conversely, from Mexico it was often the women who immigrated to the United States on their own after the chaos

Ling and Austin, “The Indian,” 312.

Ling and Austin, 312.

Leonard, Making Ethnic, 42, 45.

Wenzel, “The Rural,” 250.

Wenzel, 250.

Leonard, Making Ethnic, 40.

Wenzel, “The Rural,” 252.

Bhasin 7

of the Mexican Revolution. Known as solas, their immigration resulted in similarly skewed sex ratios.34 Consequently, individuals from both ethnic groups sought out partners beyond their own ethnicities. Anti-miscegenation laws in California prevented Indian men from marrying nonIndians.35 However, marriage with Mexican women was possible as they shared a similar skin color.36 Motivations Driving Marriage Punjabi men in California lacked citizenship rights and faced economic struggles due to cotton bankruptcies and a lack of power over prices and harvest timings.37 As a result, scholars have argued that Punjabi-Mexican marriages were motivated by men’s desires for land and financial status, a characterization arising from many cursory analyses.38 Some suggest that when Punjabi men could not buy their own land, their Mexican-American wives purchased it for them.39 However, under the contemporaneous California laws, a wife obtained her husband’s status after marriage.40 As a result, Punjabi men marrying women purely for increased financial status would be futile. In addition, the Mexican women had very little land or financial resources to offer.41 Punjabi men, if they desired, could potentially achieve a similar degree of financial

Elizabeth Jameson and Susan Armitage, Writing the Range: Race, Class, and Culture in the Women’s West (Norman, Ok.: University of Oklahoma Press, 1997), 355. 35

Mann, Numrich, and Williams, Buddhists, Hindus, 131.

Mann, Numrich, and Williams, 131.

Leonard, Making Ethnic, 43, 53.

Charles J. McClain, Asian Indians, Filipinos, Other Asian Communities, and the Law (New York: Garland Pub., 1994), 552-53; Leonard, 70. 39

Wenzel, “The Rural,” 251.

Leonard, Making Ethnic, 70-71.

Bruce La Brack and Karen Leonard, “Conflict and Compatibility in Punjabi-Mexican Immigrant Families in Rural California, 1915-1965,” Journal of Marriage and the Family 46, no. 3 (August 1984): 529, JSTOR. 41

Bhasin 8

success independently by attaining loans with exceedingly low interest rates.42 Another common misconception postulates that marriages were motivated by desires to have children so that land could be put in their names. To understand the basis of this claim, it is important to recognize how it became progressively more difficult in the early 1920s for men to quickly ascend “the agricultural ladder” due to legal obstacles and technological changes.43 These developments meant great importance was placed on families operating farms and children inheriting land in order to build multi-generational wealth. Thus, marriage and birthing children was an enticing prospect. With the difficulties immigrants faced bringing their wives and the skewed sex ratios, it was necessary for Punjabi men to carry on their families through marriage to Mexican women. However, the strategy of putting land in children’s names was not used until 1934, after many of the Punjabi-Mexican unions had occurred.44 Hence, it could not have incentivized the initial marriages. Others affirm that marriages for land could have occurred illegally due to negligence at the county record offices. Without these legal barriers, Punjabi men could have been motivated to marry Mexican women for economic and financial gain.45 To address this misconception, it is necessary to adduce the marriage dates. Punjabi-Mexican marriages were occurring by 1916, with “some small degree of assimilation” of Punjabis into Mexican-American society happening by 1920.46 Karen Leonard describes that by 1923, the Punjabi-Mexican marriage patterns were

Wenzel, “The Rural,” 252.

Leonard, Making Ethnic, 21, 23-24.

Leonard, 71.

McClain, Asian Indians, 552-53.

La Brack and Leonard, “Conflict and Compatibility,” 529; Wenzel, “The Rural,” 253.

Bhasin 9

“firmly established.”47 By 1924, seventy-three unions occurred between Sikh men and nonIndian women, fifty-eight of which were with Mexican women.48 However, Punjabi men were not barred from owning land until 1923, when the Bhagat Singh Thind Supreme Court case declared that they were not citizens.49 With the marriage patterns conventional by this date, economic and financial incentives were not at play. Thus, it is fitting to explore how social norms and cultural values influenced compatibility, increasing the degree to which the marriages were considered a reasonable and attractive option among both ethnic groups. Yusuf Dadabhay describes, “Most men were thus deprived of female associates from the same culture and way of life.”50 Punjabi men’s reasons for seeking out marriage were fundamentally emotional, cultural, and present in their lifestyles and value systems. Shared Cultural Values Many shared cultural values stemmed from comparable obstacles and class standings. Mexican women experienced economic hardship prior to their immigration to the United States due to the unrest of the Mexican Revolution, as did Punjabi men due to disruption from Punjab’s modernization.51 Since both Punjabi men and Mexican women faced struggles and adversity in their home countries, they shared a propensity for strength and determination in the face of undesirable circumstances and economic challenges in their new homes.52 Personal

Leonard, Making Ethnic, 70-71.

Bruce La Brack, “Evolution of Sikh Family Form and Values in Rural California: Continuity and Change 1904 1980,” Journal of Comparative Family Studies 19, no. 2 (1988): 289. 48

Ling and Austin, “The Indian,” 312.

Y. Dadabhay, “Circuitous Assimilation among Rural Hindustanis in California,” Social Forces 33, no. 2 (December 1, 1954): 140, JSTOR. 50

Jameson and Armitage, Writing the Range, 355.

James F. Elliott, “Cotton: A Love Story Across Cultures,” n.n. (Tuscon), 1988, 5.

Bhasin 10

relationships were further strengthened over common desires for financial stability and success in California.53 The potential rewards driving these ambitions can be quantified: Punjabi men and Mexican women could earn much more money in the United States than in their homelands. One source reported this disparity to be $2.00 per day in the United States for what would be $0.16 in India.54 Mexican workers earned $1.00 to $3.00 per day in the United States compared to $0.15 in their native country.55 Within both groups, values and aspirations were shaped by individuals’ historical experiences that instilled intense longings for a better life, which was believed to be accomplished through hard work and by acting on one’s ambitions and dreams. Their struggles would continue in the United States. Like Punjabi men, who faced both casual and legal discrimination, Mexicans were historically subject to segregation.56 They “endured low wages and deplorable working conditions.”57 People of color were also grouped together in certain sections of towns: Punjabis and Mexicans were channeled into living spaces for the “foreign,” along with other Asians.58 Punjabi men frequently settled in areas populated by Mexicans immigrant and other low status groups, and were often assumed to be Mexican.59 In other cases, because their homes were often located in rural areas far from the rest of society, the few neighbors that existed were Mexican families.60 Restaurants and hotels were segregated in

Elliott, 6.

Leonard, Making Ethnic, 29-30.

J. Andres, Power and Control, 102.

Jameson and Armitage, Writing the Range, 355.

Villanueva, Haynes, and Richmond, The Mexican, 128.

Leonard, Making Ethnic, 33, 42.

Dadabhay, “Circuitous Assimilation,” 140.

Dadabhay, 140.

Bhasin 11

the Imperial Valley, preventing Punjabis from accessing the same facilities for business and recreation. On occasion, Indian men were refused meals or criticized by other guests, but establishments owned by people of color, such as Mexicans, were often more fair and welcoming.61 It is likely that discrimination and a common sense of being ostracized by American society engendered a feeling of solidarity between the two ethnic groups. Moreover, social factors working against both groups potentially spurred them to marry people of a similar perceived inferior status. These common emotions and sense of resilience allowed the partners to achieve potential compatibility. Since both partners faced discrimination and isolation from American society, they turned to their unions as a source of comfort and closeness, which further strengthened marital bonds. Punjabi men and Mexican women forged connections through work life.62 In both cultures, family life extended into employment: women and children often worked alongside the men.63 Punjabis and Mexicans shared an agricultural lifestyle, picking cotton, fruit, and vegetables together. Mexicans often provided Punjabis with assistance and helped them orient themselves.64 Since working with the cotton crop was difficult labor delegated to people of a lower class status, the shared values of hard work and determination were strengthened. Punjabi men led non-luxurious lifestyles and let go of cultural and religious expectations, instead committed to work seven days each week.65 This flexibility is generally indicative of the community’s willingness to prioritize work life.

Leonard, Making Ethnic, 42.

Dadabhay, “Circuitous Assimilation,” 140.

Leonard, Making Ethnic, 63.

Dadabhay, “Circuitous Assimilation,” 140.

Wenzel, “The Rural,” 252.

Bhasin 12

Flexibility in Sikhism The compatibility of such unions was contingent on cultural flexibility, a phenomenon evidently familiar to Punjabi-Sikhs. Punjabi cultural values of risk-taking, courage, adaptability, and resilience were exhibited on occasions prior to the Punjabi-Mexican community’s emergence. In 1910, while Sikh units were stationed in Hong Kong, a gurdwara, or Sikh place of worship, was built.66 Two years later, the same was done in Stockton, California.67 This was the first gurdwara to be constructed in the United States.68 Perhaps the Punjabis’ ability to adapt despite new, unfamiliar cultural environments was developed through their experiences in India, which was subject to British rule. The British came to respect Punjabis for their abilities, confidence, and hard-working nature.69 In the Punjabi-Mexican marriages, some degree of compromise and flexibility would be integral due to the unfamiliarity and difference in cultural identity. The Sikh religion was a crucial part of the Punjabi identity and influenced work and family life. For instance, among rural Punjabis, Sikh prayers and hymns were recited in formal meetings, and were a part of weddings and funerals, as well as social functions and ceremonies for naming children.70 Sikhism, unlike other religions in India, rejected the caste system and the divisions that it promoted, instead placing greater emphasis on equality.71 As a result, flexibility and a willingness to engage with others despite being unfamiliar were common ideals among

Leonard, Making Ethnic, 30.

Ling and Austin, “The Indian,” 316.

Ling and Austin, 316.

Leonard, Making Ethnic, 25.

Wenzel, “The Rural,” 256.

Leonard, Making Ethnic, 26.

Bhasin 13

Punjabi-Sikhs. Although religious interpretations differed among individuals, the fundamental beliefs were shared and maintained across the Punjabi ethnic group.72 In the United States, Punjabi men continued to place great importance on values emphasized under Sikhism such as hard work, determination, family life, and equality. Family Life The overarching problem experienced by the Punjabi men was the “loss of intimacy and home life.”73 Feelings of loneliness were prevalent as a result of legal and social barriers, as well as the tough, repetitive work in labor camps. Thus, marriage offered a preferable living arrangement, and a culture developed among Punjabi men in which they sought a stable domestic life.74 This ideal included a wife who could maintain the house and cook food, offering relief and comfort.75 The Mexican women fulfilled these needs, providing them with friendship and intimacy through personal and social relationships with women and children. Relationships were often initiated with the women allowing the men to enter their homes, demonstrating an unusual level of genuine amicability.76 Mexican culture encouraged women to marry so that they could raise children and run the household. These responsibilities were considered preferable to working in the fields.77 Punjabi men were heavily involved in manual labor, working in the cotton fields like Mexican women. As a result, marriage offered women the opportunity to leave the fields since their husbands

Wenzel, “The Rural,” 246.

Dadabhay, “Circuitous Assimilation,” 141.

La Brack, “Evolution of Sikh,” 290.

La Brack, 290.

Dadabhay, “Circuitous Assimilation,” 141.

Elliott, “Cotton: A Love,” 5.

Bhasin 14

could take over those roles. Crucial Sikh values included “sharing the fruits of one’s labor” and exhibiting hard work and determination.78 Family and community were central.79 These ideals were accordant with the motivations of the Mexican women. Although both cultures generally promoted patriarchal structures, gender roles in the Punjab-Mexican marriages were more flexible, with a greater degree of expected equality. Patriarchal ideals were merely “ideologically shared initially.”80 Indeed, the wife was the center of social life, and many of the family’s relationships consequently revolved around her acquaintances.81 Sometimes, the parents of Mexican wives, if they lived nearby, would reside with the couple.82 However, this was not found to occur with the men’s parents.83 If the wives died or left, their children would often be placed under the care of the Mexican aunts or grandmothers.84 The value placed on mutual responsibility and equalitarian ideals in Sikh culture instilled flexibility and a willingness to seek partners outside of their ethnic group among Punjabi men, as well as to promote parity and collaboration between men and women in the marriages.85 The Sikh value of secular success allowed men to advance with emphasis on endeavors that could be shared with their wives, aside from religion. In addition, men may have been more willing to

Mann, Numrich, and Williams, Buddhists, Hindus, 118.

Mann, Numrich, and Williams, 118.

La Brack, “Evolution of Sikh,” 290.

Dadabhay, “Circuitous Assimilation,” 141.

La Brack and Leonard, “Conflict and Compatibility,” 531.

La Brack and Leonard, 531.

Wenzel, “The Rural,” 247; Mann, Numrich, and Williams, Buddhists, Hindus, 143.

Bhasin 15

engage in relationships in which women had influence over finances or land, and where patriarchal structures did not manifest themselves. Punjabi men often grew vegetables in a family garden, strengthening the emphasis on family life and on building a sustainable and independent household.86 Men were also accustomed to preparing meals, as they had previously done for work and religious groups.87 In their marriages to Mexican women, they made culinary contributions in a variety of contexts, occasionally cooking Punjabi meals for family and friends, excitedly preparing traditional sweets and desserts for their kids, and fixing curative foods for the sick.88 An element of Punjabi Sikh culture was for men to marry sets of related women, such as sisters.89 The Mexican women willingly engaged in “marriage by reference,” meaning that daughters, cousins, sisters, and mothers of a Mexican woman would marry relatives and friends of her Punjabi Sikh husband.90 This pattern of marriages is remarkably similar to that of the arranged marriages practiced by Punjabis. The tendency of Mexican women to maintain this Punjabi cultural tradition can be quantified: in Southern California, 101 of 239 Mexican wives had female relatives were married to Punjabis, while in Central California, 17 of the 50 of the Punjabi men’s wives were related.91 This consistency in marriage practices was likely in part due to the struggles and separation experienced by families within both ethnic groups, resulting in a desire for closeness within and across families. Thus, it was desirable for partners to maintain

Wenzel, 252.

La Brack and Leonard, “Conflict and Compatibility,” 533.

La Brack and Leonard, 533.

La Brack, “Evolution of Sikh,” 290.

La Brack, 289.

Leonard, Making Ethnic, 69.

Bhasin 16

marriage structures involving recommendations and references from friends and family in order to strengthen familial ties and create the much-needed sense of intimacy. Extended family structures were of great importance in both cultures and manifested themselves in various forms in marriage. Among American families, these networks were not emphasized nearly as much as in Punjabi or Mexican culture. Americans were often more isolated from extended family, exemplifying a dominant nuclear family norm.92 Mexican culture differed from this standard and “the Spanish term familia would include parents, children, grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins.”93 In Mexican culture, one of the most prominent examples of extended family structures was the compadrazgo system, wherein compadres served as unrelated godparents who sponsored “a child’s baptism, first communion, wedding, or other life event.”94 In Indian culture, a similarly importance was placed on extended family. Grandparents often visited and were welcomed. Financially stable members helped extend family in need, and individuals spent leisure time with grandparents, aunt, uncles and cousins.95 Generally, this allowed parents to ensure that familial and cultural ties were maintained among their offspring.96 Driven by the shared value placed on such structures, a variation of the Mexican compadrazago system existed in the marriages, with the godparents usually a Punjabi man and Mexican woman.97 This system strengthened social and cultural ties, enhanced the

Claudia H. Roesch, Macho Men and Modern Women: Mexican Immigration, Social Experts and Changing Family Values in the 20th Century United States (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter GmbH, 2015), 318. 93

Roesch, Macho Men and Modern, 318.

Roesch, 318.

Ling and Austin, “The Indian,” 311, 313, 325.

Ling and Austin, 326.

La Brack and Leonard, “Conflict and Compatibility,” 531.

Bhasin 17

childrearing process, and helped to reduce the effect of cultural barriers. In fulfilling their responsibilities under the compadrazago system, Punjabi men attended Catholic church for baptism and valued their roles as godparents, providing children both nonmaterial and material support.98 Children were an important and necessary part of the marriages, in part due to the rejection of birth control by Mexicans and its undesirability in Sikh culture.99 The birth of children occurred very soon after marriage and sometimes even before.100 Women who did not have children were pestered by others to do so and rituals were performed to induce fertility in some cases.101 The childrearing process necessitated that parents worked together to find effective methods of raising a new multiethnic generation, and shared common goals and tasks of childrearing. Thus, children likely strengthened the emotional bond and degree of intimacy in Punjabi-Mexican relationships by instilling a sense of commitment. In Punjab, religious distinctions could be overcome by other connections, namely, those arising from familial ties and proximity.102 These factors, of utmost importance in the husbands’ homeland, outweighed the religious differences between Punjabis and Mexicans, as did the strength of the bond arising from the presence of children. Both cultures celebrated the birth of a child.103 For one Punjabi-Mexican couple, such a celebration occurred right outside of a

La Brack and Leonard, 532.

La Brack, “Evolution of Sikh,” 290-91.

100

Leonard, Making Ethnic, 76.

101

Elliott, “Cotton: A Love,” 6.

102

Leonard, Making Ethnic, 25.

103

Elliott, “Cotton: A Love,” 6.

Bhasin 18

Christian chapel with a cross attached to the building.104 The occasion was enough to bring the distinct cultures together for festivities despite their differences in religious affiliation, demonstrating how the shared cultural values, in this case, emphasis on children, was a significant driving force in permitting compatible unions. Cultural Compatibility Cultural compatibility extended far beyond shared experiences of hardship and the aforementioned work and family values. Many of the similarities between Punjabis and Mexicans lay in the material culture such as cuisine and decor. Culinary similitude strongly enhanced cultural compatibility. Both cultures respected women for their roles in cooking and maintaining the home. Customary meals from both ethnic groups shared many characteristics: They were heavy, spicy, often based in dairy products and breads, and frequently fried and prepared via direct heat.105 Roti, a kind of Punjabi bread, bore close resemblance to the Mexican tortilla, save for its relatively greater flexibility.106 In both cultures, breads were integral in preparing many meals. Punjab is called “the land of rotis” due to the role of bread as a staple.107 Likewise, tacos, or prefried tortillas, revolutionized Mexican cuisine due to their convenience and efficiency.108 Tortillas are used regularly in many other Mexican dishes, including burritos and enchiladas.109 Customs while preparing meals in the two cultures also bore similarities: both

104

Elliott, 6.

105

La Brack and Leonard, “Conflict and Compatibility,” 533.

106

Wenzel, “The Rural,” 246.

107

Colleen Taylor Sen, Feasts and Fasts: A History of Food in India (London, UK: Reaktion Books, 2015), 248.

108

Jeffrey M. Pilcher, Planet Taco: A Global History of Mexican Food (Cary: Oxford University Press, USA, 2014),

4. 109

Pilcher, 46, 102.

Bhasin 19

often sat on the floor while making tortillas or rotis, for instance.110 There were, however, some inconsistencies: Punjabi men were unaccustomed to the frequent use of corn in Mexican cuisine.111 Due to the considerable degree of similarity between the two cuisines, Mexican wives easily learned to prepare and serve the foods that Punjabi husbands enjoyed and remembered from their homelands. For the husbands, this was more than adequate: a satisfying variation of the traditional Punjabi cuisine. In both cultures, the living space was indicative of status. The couples prioritized gardens with fresh produce, but were generally negligent to the maintenance of lawns, landscaping, or abandoned objects.112 These behaviors were likely a result of the shared value placed on hard work and prioritizing practical and financial needs over superfluous ones related to class, social standing, and aesthetic norms. There were physical objects in the homes related to the tastes of both men and women. Sometimes, there were decorations of two cultures placed side-by-side, such as “the Virgin Mary, Christ, and various saints displayed alongside paper poster or calendar art of the Gurus.”113 Thus, decor served the cultural and ethnic interests of both the husbands and wives. Mexicans and Punjabis stood in approximately the same place in the "color hierarchy," meaning that they shared similar external physical traits, potentially explaining the gravitation to each other.114 These traits included dark hair, eyes, and skin color.115 Color, in many ways, was

110

Leonard, Making Ethnic, 116.

111

La Brack and Leonard, “Conflict and Compatibility,” 533.

112

La Brack and Leonard, 533.

113

La Brack and Leonard, 530.

114

Dadabhay, “Circuitous Assimilation,” 140.

115

La Brack and Leonard, “Conflict and Compatibility,” 533.

Bhasin 20

tied to economic and social class based on how Mexicans and Punjabis were perceived by white American society. Indians were initially viewed as “white,” yet the 1923 Thind decision ruled they were not.116 Similarly, Mexicans were recategorized by the United States Census from “white” to their own race in 1930.117 In this context, color potentially drove, and justified, the ostracization of both ethnic groups, causing circumstances that proved to have their own distinct effects leading to marriage. The Role of the American Environment Yet, non-material cultural differences were prominent: namely, across religion and language. Much of the reason why the partners were capable of finding compatibility in these areas was the American environment in which the marriages took place. The interracial marriages between Punjabi men and Mexican women were shaped by an overarching process deemed “circuitous assimilation.” This phenomenon describes how a smaller ethnic minority, Punjabis, adapted to American society by assimilation into a “larger, better recognized ethnic minority,” in this case, through marriage to Mexicans.118 Consequently, Mexican culture was often naturally favored in the marriages, while the Punjabi Sikh culture was subject to Americanization. This process likely induced compatibility by preventing disputes arising from differences in tradition between Punjabi husbands and Mexican wives. Religious customs in gurdwaras were relaxed in the 1940s. Worshippers no longer removed shoes or covered their hair, and chairs were added, with people no longer sitting on the

116

Ling and Austin, “The Indian,” 312.

117

La Brack and Leonard, “Conflict and Compatibility,” 533.

118

Wenzel, “The Rural,” 253.

Bhasin 21

floor.119 The aforementioned Stockton gurdwara built in 1912, remained the only one in the United States until 1948.120 The lack of new gurdwaras exemplifies the broader lack of growth and enthusiasm within the Sikh community: “The link to tradition, to culture, to family is forged, and maintained, through the gurudwara … gurudwaras provide a home away from home, and are critical to Sikh immigrant identity in Western Europe as well as North America.”121 The gradual fading away of Sikh tradition demonstrates a significant trend: The effect of Americanization on diminishing the prevalence and need for Sikh culture and religious practices. The Punjabi men displayed flexibility in the religious upbringing of their offspring for a multitude of reasons. In addition to the aforementioned trends, Sikhism placed great emphasis on equality and respect regardless of religious background. One man declared: “After all, it’s the same God,” while another couple suggested that there exists “Only one God” who “gives a lot of different languages.”122 Moreover, Punjabi men devoted considerable time to expanding their land holdings in the United States, and thus had little time left for teaching their children the tenets of Sikhism.123 However, this prioritization of financial stability over the transmission of religion to progeny enhanced cultural compatibility, as faith was a major area of difference between Punjabi men and Mexican women. Not passing on Sikhism resulted in the flexibility necessary for harmonious relationships. Most marriages occurred as non-religious civil

119

Mann, Numrich, and Williams, Buddhists, Hindus, 130.

120

Mann, Numrich, and Williams, 129.

121

Bruce B. Lawrence, New Faiths, Old Fears: Muslims and Other Asian Immigrants in American Religious Life (New York: Columbia University Press, 2002), 98. 122

La Brack, “Evolution of Sikh,” 291; Leonard, Making Ethnic, 116.

123

Mann, Numrich, and Williams, Buddhists, Hindus, 131.

Bhasin 22

ceremonies, and a few occurred as Catholic ceremonies, in part due to the lack of gurdwaras and Punjabi men not maintaining Sikh religion and Punjabi language.124 Punjabi men’s flexibility surrounding language promoted more effective communication in households, a crucial factor driving compatibility, convenience, and intimacy in the unions. Punjabi men demonstrated adaptability and a willingness to learn new languages, which was regarded as highly respectable. In some documented cases, this meant learning three languages: “Hindu,” “Mexican,” and English.125 Indeed, they learned their home language, the language of their spouse, and the language of the new nation that they were living in. Since it was already necessary in some cases to learn English, it became significantly more reasonable and seemingly more achievable to learn Spanish as well, which was often helpful when working in the fields.126 In addition, Punjabi-Mexicans described how “Spanish is just like Punjabi,” noting similarities in the lexicon and grammar.127 Fathers also did not teach their children Punjabi. Considering that they were in the United States and their children would be citizens, it was regarded as impractical. Thus, children only ever learned a very small amount of Punjabi, which was used exclusively in conversation with their fathers in the fields.128 One daughter, in an interview, described how she experienced great disappointment when her father revealed that he would stop giving her Punjabi lessons.129 As with the choice to cease passing on Sikhism, the Punjabi men’s decisions to not pass on the Punjabi language likely furthered cultural

124

Leonard, Making Ethnic, 68.

125

Leonard, 58.

126

La Brack, “Evolution of Sikh,” 291.

127

Leonard, Making Ethnic, 115.

128

La Brack and Leonard, “Conflict and Compatibility,” 530.

129

Leonard, Making Ethnic, 125.

Bhasin 23

compatibility in the marriages, ensuring that language was no longer a barrier or source of discord between the two ethnic groups, especially with raising children. However, it was a clear sign of Americanization. Mexican wives attempted to Americanize their Punjabi husbands in a variety of ways. In addition to providing them with socially “acceptable” clothing, they used money that Punjabi men would have preferred to spend on farming equipment and land to purchase improved school supplies and clothes for their children.130 Children were raised to practice Catholicism, speak Spanish and English, and use both Mexican tortillas and Indian rotis.131 These trends exemplify the mix and exchange of cultures and traditions that occurred as a result of the marriages. However, Mexican culture was dominant in both language and religion, and Punjabi-Mexican children were considered “Mexican” by society and in schools. Children’s names were mostly Mexican and the few boys with Indian names often went by Mexican nicknames.132 Children were raised with profound ties to Mexican society but not South Asian society, with which they consequently lacked a strong identification.133 To explain this disparity, it is important to consider how in both Punjabi and Mexican culture, the wife was the center and focus of social life and raising children, while the husband was often more involved with work and economic advancement, further evidence of the marriages’ cultural compatibility due to the common value placed on specific roles.

130

La Brack and Leonard, “Conflict and Compatibility,” 530.

131

Lee, History of Asian, 75.

132

La Brack and Leonard, “Conflict and Compatibility,” 530.

133

La Brack, “Evolution of Sikh,” 291.

Bhasin 24

Mann, Numrich, and Williams describe “The expectation in America is that you will marry the person you come to love; in India the expectation is you will love the one you marry.”134 With it being established that economic status was not the purpose of the marriages, it is crucial to consider that American cultural expectations influenced Punjabi men and Mexican women to marry based on factors like love. The Punjabi cultural norms surrounding arranged marriages likely played a key role in the Punjabi-Mexican community’s expansion as relatives and friends often helped each other find partners. However, American culture promoted marriages that occurred on the basis of love rather than purely arranged or forced factors, inducing Punjabi men and Mexican women to marry in spite of their differences. For similar reasons, traditional Punjabi belief that interracial marriage was not ideal or conventional could also be overcome in the United States. However, these American ideals surrounding the value placed on love in relationships did lead to an area of conflict in the marriages. With the wife being the center of parenting and social life in both Punjabi and Mexican culture, she had the most influence over the rules set for daughters, which was a source of disagreement between partners. While Punjabi men attempted to limit how much their children dated or engaged in romantic relationships, Mexican women overrode these limits and permitted more freedom.135 Mexican women supported their daughters’ dating and attending dances and parties more than Punjabi men expected or desired.136 In the original Punjabi-Mexican marriages, women were often willing to engage in arranged marriages or have sisters or related women marry sets of men, keeping with Punjabi tradition. However, it

134

Mann, Numrich, and Williams, Buddhists, Hindus, 84.

Allison Varzally, “Romantic Crossings: Making Love, Family, and Non-Whiteness in California, 1925-1950,” Journal of American Ethnic History 23 (2003): 24. 135

136

La Brack, “Evolution of Sikh,” 291-92.

Bhasin 25

was due to the effects of American culture, such as being influenced by their peers, that led daughters to assume more freedom than their counterparts in Punjab. A New Wave of Immigration The failure of husbands to pass on the Sikh religion and Punjabi language demonstrates the effects of circuitous assimilation and Americanization, wherein Mexican culture and monetary gains were prioritized in the marriages. Consequently, a precarious situation arose: New immigrants arriving from Punjab would have conflicts with the Punjabi men already in California. The 1946 Luce-Celler Bill allowed Indian immigration to the United States once again. Many came under immigration quotas, but the majority relocated to the United States as “relatives of naturalized citizens.”137 As a result, there were already many close familial ties and emotional relationships between Punjabi men living in the United States and the new immigrants coming from India. In 1965 the Hart-Celler Immigration Act eliminated “a long-standing bias against Asians and other people that had been enforced through quotas based on national origin.”138 These quotas previously existed to “save the United States,” “preserve the status quo,” and “guard stability.”139 With the abolishment of such exclusions, the number of Asian immigrants rose significantly.140 The new Sikh immigrants settled in the north, while the Punjabi-Mexican communities had emerged in central and southern California. New immigrants were much more traditional and engaged in practices consistent with that mindset. For instance, they encouraged traditional

137

Wenzel, “The Rural,” 251.

138

Lawrence, New Faiths, 110.

139

Cheryl Lynne Shanks, Immigration and the Politics of American Sovereignty, 1890-1990 (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2009), 149. 140

Shanks, Immigration and the Politics, 182; Lawrence, New Faiths, 1.

Bhasin 26

long hair, turbans, outfits, and gurdwara practices. Thus, there were significant differences in attitudes and behaviors between the new immigrants and Punjabi men who had married Mexican women.141 The husbands may have been disillusioned when they were met with traditional Sikhs from India, struggling to understand whether their methods of “cultural expression” represented the Sikh religion as a whole.142 Bruce La Brack describes: There exist two very distinct phases of Sikh family life in California and on the west coast generally. The first is characterized by out-marriage to Hispanic women by Punjabi immigrant males and the relative dominance of Spanish-American influences within the Sikh-Mexican family. The second phase begins with the gradual reestablishment of more traditional Sikh families whose values were increasingly shaped by direct contact with South Asian ideals and models as Indian immigrants from India and elsewhere took up residence in the United States including California, a preferred destination for many Sikhs.143 Punjabi husbands shifted away from traditional religion and language and widened the disparities between their way of life and that of the new, more traditional immigrants.144 However, this dynamic further accentuates that the marriages display overwhelming indication of cultural and social compatibility. Punjabi men, in their unions with Mexican women, achieved compatibility through their flexibility, sacrifices, and cultural shifts. A byproduct was a greater degree of cultural difference with the new immigrants.

141

Leonard, Making Ethnic, 189-90.

142

Mann, Numrich, and Williams, Buddhists, Hindus, 12.

143

La Brack, “Evolution of Sikh,” 288.

144

Dadabhay, “Circuitous Assimilation,” 141.

Bhasin 27

Sita Bali explains, “Outmarriages which were quite common among earlier Sikh males, especially in the Imperial Valley of California, have proved an exception.”145 Across many nations, Sikhs consistently maintained cultural and social norms without external influence. Bali further describes how "Outmarriages into the host society are almost insignificant, while interreligious marriages with Hindus or Muslims almost rare."146 Even within India, where disparities between cultures and religions were much less significant or even negligible, intermarriage was extremely rare. For Punjabis and Mexicans, distinctions between the cultures were greater, yet intermarriage nonetheless occurred. Ultimately, members of both ethnic groups reverted to traditional intraracial marriages, and the Punjabi-Mexican community began to die out. In some areas, it was rendered essentially “frozen in time,” despite attempts to attract new Sikhs through methods like constructing more gurdwaras.147 The El Ranchero taqueria, after serving customers for four decades, closed down.148 However, the legacy of California’s Punjabi-Mexican community looms large, representing an instance of taking control over ethnic identity. Werner Sollors describes “Ethnicity will never be obsolete in America as long as there are ethnic minorities;” a claim that is likely in part due to “The idea that the person who looks like me represents my interests is compelling in a society where descent has been a means of social division.”149 However, as described by Ernesto Caravantes, “Diversity can build strength; the key is in finding ways to

145

Sita Bali, Sikhs: The Search for Statehood (Hornsby: Piscean Productions, 1996), 67.

146

Bali, 66.

147

Mann, Numrich, and Williams, Buddhists, Hindus, 132.

148

Mann, Numrich, and Williams, 131-32.

149

Werner Sollors, The Invention of Ethnicity (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991), 230; Sollors, 97.

Bhasin 28

make the diversity in our nation a source of unity, and not of strife and division.”150 Through their persistence in a new territory, Punjabis and Mexicans employed the flexibility of ethnic identity to maintain tradition, appreciating and fusing their existing cultures. The marriages proved multiculturalism served individual interests, rather than rendered a governmental tool promoting discriminatory designations and prompting division—the precise political climate in which these marriages occurred. Indeed, the Punjabi-Mexican community’s existence substantiates the notion put forth by Joane Nagel that: “Ethnicity is the product of actions undertaken by ethnic groups as they shape and reshape their self-definition and culture; however, ethnicity is also constructed by external social, economic, and political processes and actors as they shape and reshape ethnic categories and definitions.”151 The roti quesadilla, served at El Ranchero, representing the entirety of California’s Punjabi-Mexican community, is indicative of trends and patterns that have continued for over a century. Attitudes toward intermarriage have been changing for the positive in the United States. At the time of the Punjabi-Mexican community’s existence, the legislation barring immigration from foreign nations, as well as the anti-miscegenation laws, caused individuals in America to regard mixed-race people with disgust, leading to incidents of discrimination. The children of the Punjabi-Mexican families experienced such discrimination, as they were targeted by both teachers and students at school.152 In the present day, rather than interracial unions being

150

Ernesto Caravantes, From Melting Pot to Witch’s Cauldron: How Multiculturalism Failed America (Lanham, Md.: Hamilton Books, 2010), 57. Joane Nagel, “Constructing Ethnicity: Creating and Recreating Ethnic Identity and Culture,” Social Problems 41, no. 1 (February 1994): 152, JSTOR. 151

152

Varzally, “Romantic Crossings,” 29.

Bhasin 29

anomalies, they occur regularly and are viewed favorably by about half of the general public.153 With the highest rates of intermarriage existing among Asians and Hispanics, there has been a consistent rise in its occurrence since 1967, when it was legalized by the Supreme Court in the case Loving v. Virginia.154 Thus, California’s Punjabi-Mexican community, despite its transitory existence, remains a perpetual representation of the cultural amalgamation that has, and continues to occur, throughout United States history—revealing the value of such intersections in preserving, forming, and celebrating unique group identities.

Kim Parker, Rich Morin, and Juliana Menasce Horowitz, “Looking to the Future, Public Sees an America in Decline on Many Fronts,” Pew Research Center, last modified March 21, 2019. 153

Gretchen Livingston and Anna Brown, “Intermarriage in the U.S. 50 Years After Loving v. Virginia,” Pew Research Center, last modified May 18, 2017. 154

Bhasin 30

Bibliography Bali, Sita. Sikhs: The Search for Statehood. Hornsby: Piscean Productions, 1996. Caravantes, Ernesto. From Melting Pot to Witch's Cauldron: How Multiculturalism Failed America. Lanham, Md.: Hamilton Books, 2010. Chopra, Sonia. "California's Lost (and Found) Punjabi-Mexican Cuisine." Eater. Last modified April 23, 2019. https://www.eater.com/2019/4/23/18305011/punjabi-mexican-migrationroti-quesadilla-el-ranchero. Dadabhay, Y. "Circuitous Assimilation among Rural Hindustanis in California." Social Forces 33, no. 2 (December 1, 1954): 138-41. JSTOR. Elliott, James F. "Cotton: A Love Story Across Cultures." April 1988, 5-6, Guide to Karen Leonard's Punjabi-Mexican American papers M1808, Stanford University: Manuscripts Division. "Examining Latino and Punjabi Sikh Identity." Journeys at Dartmouth. https://journeys.dartmouth.edu/finalcurationsunny/making-of-the-punjabi-mexicancommunity/. Fuller, Levi Varden. "The Supply of Agricultural Labor as a Factor in the Evolution of Farm Organization in California." PhD diss., University of California, Berkeley, 1939. Gottlieb, Benjamin. "Punjabi Sikh-Mexican American Community Fading into History." The Washington Post. Last modified August 13, 2012. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/punjabi-sikh-mexican-americancommunity-fading-into-history/2012/08/13/cc6b7b98-e26b-11e1-98e789d659f9c106_story.html. Jameson, Elizabeth, and Susan Armitage. Writing the Range: Race, Class, and Culture in the Women's West. Norman, Ok.: University of Oklahoma Press, 1997. J. Andres, Benny. Power and Control in the Imperial Valley: Nature, Agribusiness, and Workers on the California Borderland, 1900-1940. College Station: Texas A & M University Press, 2016. La Brack, Bruce. "Evolution of Sikh Family Form and Values in Rural California: Continuity and Change 1904 - 1980." Journal of Comparative Family Studies 19, no. 2 (1988): 287-309. La Brack, Bruce, and Karen Leonard. "Conflict and Compatibility in Punjabi-Mexican Immigrant Families in Rural California, 1915-1965." Journal of Marriage and the Family 46, no. 3 (August 1984): 527. JSTOR.

Bhasin 31

Lawrence, Bruce B. New Faiths, Old Fears: Muslims and Other Asian Immigrants in American Religious Life. New York: Columbia University Press, 2002. Lee, Jonathan H. X. History of Asian Americans: Exploring Diverse Roots. Enhanced Credo edition ed. Santa Barbara, CA: Greenwood, an imprint of ABC-CLIO, 2015. Leonard, Karen. Making Ethnic Choices: California's Punjabi Mexican Americans. Philadelphia PA: Temple University Press, 2010. Ling, Huping, and Allan W. Austin. "The Asian American Experience: History, Culture, and Scholarship." In Asian American History and Culture: An Encyclopedia. London: Routledge, 2015. ———. "The Chinese American Experience: History and Culture." In Asian American History and Culture: An Encyclopedia. London: Routledge, 2015. ———. "The Indian American Experience: History and Culture." In Asian American History and Culture: An Encyclopedia. London: Routledge, 2015. ———. "The Japanese American Experience: History and Culture." In Asian American History and Culture: An Encyclopedia. London: Routledge, 2015. Livingston, Gretchen, and Anna Brown. "Intermarriage in the U.S. 50 Years After Loving v. Virginia." Pew Research Center. Last modified May 18, 2017. https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/05/18/intermarriage-in-the-u-s-50-yearsafter-loving-v-virginia/. Mann, Gurinder Singh, Paul David Numrich, and Raymond B. Williams. Buddhists, Hindus, and Sikhs in America. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. McClain, Charles J. Asian Indians, Filipinos, Other Asian Communities, and the Law. New York: Garland Pub., 1994. Nagel, Joane. "Constructing Ethnicity: Creating and Recreating Ethnic Identity and Culture." Social Problems 41, no. 1 (February 1994): 152-76. JSTOR. Parker, Kim, Rich Morin, and Juliana Menasce Horowitz. "Looking to the Future, Public Sees an America in Decline on Many Fronts." Pew Research Center. Last modified March 21, 2019. https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2019/03/21/views-of-demographicchanges-in-america/. Pilcher, Jeffrey M. Planet Taco: A Global History of Mexican Food. Cary: Oxford University Press, USA, 2014.

Bhasin 32

Roesch, Claudia H. Macho Men and Modern Women: Mexican Immigration, Social Experts and Changing Family Values in the 20th Century United States. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter GmbH, 2015. Sen, Colleen Taylor. Feasts and Fasts: A History of Food in India. London, UK: Reaktion Books, 2015. Shanks, Cheryl Lynne. Immigration and the Politics of American Sovereignty, 1890-1990. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2009. Sollors, Werner. The Invention of Ethnicity. New York: Oxford University Press, 1991. Taylor, Paul S. "California Farm Labor: A Review." Agricultural History 42, no. 1 (1968): 4954. JSTOR. Varzally, Allison. "Romantic Crossings: Making Love, Family, and Non-Whiteness in California, 1925-1950." Journal of American Ethnic History 23 (2003): 3-54. Villanueva, Nicholas, Sam W. Haynes, and Douglas W. Richmond. The Mexican Revolution: Conflict and Consolidation, 1910-1940. College Station: Texas A & M University Press, 2013. Wenzel, Lawrence A. "The Rural Punjabis of California: A Religio-Ethnic Group." Phylon (1960-) 29, no. 3 (1968): 245. JSTOR.

The Harker School | 500 Saratoga Ave., San Jose CA 95129 OofC: 3/23/21 (RM)