Dear Portal friends: Do you enjoy having history at your fingertips? We’ve appreciated your support over the years, and need your help to keep history alive. Here’s the deal: we’ve received a Challenge Grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities. Now it’s time to keep our word and raise matching funds for the Cathy Nelson Hartman Portal to Texas History Endowment. If even half the people who use the Portal this month give $5, we’d meet our $1.5 million goal immediately! All donations are tax-deductible and support Texas history: yesterday, today, and tomorrow.

Not Now

The Southwestern Historical Quarterly, Volume 52, July 1948 - April, 1949

A iratiao i#to East 'eCas
THE sources of migration into East Texas as a whole
appear in Table 3 and the upper part of Figure i. The
per cents and the diagram speak for themselves, and
require no protracted comment. The important sources are the
seven states first listed. Alabama, Tennessee, and Mississippi fur-
nished 51.8 per cent of the families. Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana,
and Missouri added 34.7 per cent. Taken together, the seven
accounted for 87.5 per cent of all families; that is to say, they
practically populated East Texas. The remaining one-eighth of
the families came mostly from Kentucky, Illinois, Indiana, and
the Carolinas. No other place contributed as much as 1 per cent.
Even ante-bellum East Texas was not, of course, a uniform
region. Table 4 and the lower part of Figure 1 show that the
sources of migration varied substantially in different parts of the
region.13 The populous upper eastern (or extreme northeastern)
and central counties set the East Texas pattern. There Alabama
arrivals took first rank by a wide margin. The upper eastern
counties were the favorites of Georgia immigrants. As might be
expected, the sharp sub-regional contrasts were between the
northern and the lower counties. For the northern counties the
major sources were Tennessee, Missouri, and Arkansas; arrivals
there from Alabama and Mississippi no more than equalled those
from Kentucky and Illinois. In the lower counties, Louisiana led,
with Mississippi and Alabama second and third; Tennessee, Mis-
souri, and Arkansas arrivals were comparatively unimportant,
and Kentucky or Illinois migrants were rare.
Figure 2 analyzes the sources of migration by four-year periods,
IsCounties do not readily fall into groups, and the arrangement here adopted
is admittedly imperfect. Especially doubtful are the separation of Henderson and
Kaufman and the assignment of Angelina and Sabine to the lower counties.

Texas State Historical Association. The Southwestern Historical Quarterly, Volume 52, July 1948 - April, 1949. Austin, Texas. The Portal to Texas History. Accessed May 2, 2016.

Beta Preview