Latin American Independence
Latin American Independence
The following text is used only for teaching, research, scholarship, educational use and informative purpose following the fair use principles.
We thank the authors of the texts and the source web site that give us the opportunity to share their knowledge
World history
Latin American Independence
Latin American Independence
The independence period in Latin American history was marked by the desire for political autonomy. However, independence was not synonymous with revolution, and in Latin America, independence did not necessarily bring social or political change. Though leaders expressed many lofty ideals, the breach with Spain and Portugal was a matter of political and economic necessity for the colonists.
Spanish America
Independence from Spain occurred because colonists grew dissatisfied with royal government. Enlightenment ideas also influenced the push for independence. The intellectuals of Europe and the Americas had begun to discuss ideas of equality, freedom, independence, and human progress, and colonists began to use these ideas to question imperial rule. Also, people born in the colonies began to feel and think of themselves as Americans rather than Europeans born overseas. They became increasingly aware of their own situations in relation to Spaniards living in the Americas and became frustrated by limitations they faced in advancing their careers and obtaining wealth and important positions in society. They also grew jealous of resources like silver that they saw benefiting the colonial state but not their own regions. This situation contributed to a rising sense of difference between Latin Americans and Europeans. This sense of difference took on a variety of forms in Latin America because of poor communications between regions where people had developed diverse cultures during the colonial period. Differences between people in Mexico and Argentina, as just two examples, informed the ways in which they thought about themselves and others, contributing to what would later become a sense of national identity that found expression in the emergence of new independent countries.
During the colonial era, there were two types of Europeans in the Americas, those born in Spain called peninsulares and Europeans born in the Americas called criollos. Criollos slowly began to feel less allegiance with Spain and more loyalty to Latin America. This caused friction between the two groups, particularly because peninsulares tended to benefit more from the colonial system and have greater opportunities.
Tense relationships between the criollos and the peninsulares contributed to the formation of a situation ripe for independence. Peninsulares usually held the highest positions in the Church, military, government, and business, and this caused resentment among the criollos. The criollos, however, did hold many important positions and had a strong voice in making the policies that would affect them. The criollos vied to win more influential positions, and they continued to advance until the French Bourbons assumed the throne in Spain.
The Bourbons sought to implement reforms that would increase imperial control over the colonies. Controlling an American empire from thousands of miles away had always been difficult. This allowed the criollos to influence policy. The criollos had become accustomed to a wide degree of autonomy, and the new French bureaucratic system imposed by the Bourbons began to reverse this situation. The criollos wanted to preserve the influence they had and were thus opposed to the Bourbon policies. The Bourbon Reforms began to generate more revenues, sometimes at the expense of the colonies where they increased tensions between the criollos and the peninsulares.
Meanwhile, there was friction between the peninsular and criollo elite and the rest of the population. The majority of the population was completely barred from political positions. The criollos feared that these people would participate in independence revolts and start popular rebellions that would not only topple Spanish rule but also criollo dominance. They had good reason to fear, since slaves in Saint-Domingue (Haiti) rebelled in 1794, killing many in their struggle for freedom. The uprising in Haiti developed into a social revolution that fundamentally transformed society, securing not only freedom for slaves but also independence, making it the second independent nation in the Americas after the United States.
Criollos wanted to protect their privileged position in society. Often, fear of the masses (the Indians, mestizos, free blacks, mulattos, and slaves) kept the criollos aligned with the peninsulares, in spite of the tensions between the two ruling groups. The criollos thought that the peninsulares and the royal government could provide protection from popular uprisings.
Spanish American colonial governments suffered from political and social tensions and growing nationalism among the colonists. Napoleon's invasion of Spain in 1808 destabilized the imperial government throughout the Americas. Napoleon’s army entered Spain and took over the throne, deposing the king who governed not only Spain but also the American colonies. In response, the Spanish American colonies established autonomous governments in Venezuela, New Granada, Argentina, and Chile. At first the colonists tried to reach an agreement with forces in Spain and royalist forces in Spanish America. This proved impossible and revolts followed.
Left with no reasonable alternative, criollos led independence movements and organized armies. The masses comprised a large portion of the revolutionary armies, but they were often reluctant participants. For blacks, the wars of independence provided a way to freedom. If a slave joined the army, then he would be freed if he survived the war. By following such a policy, the criollos showed that they never intended for the war to provide a total and immediate abolition of slavery. The criollos were not so much interested in ideals of equality as they were anxious to defeat the royalist armies.
The criollos also enlisted another group from the masses, the Indians. Indians largely tried to stay out of the wars as much as possible, although some participated from a desire to effect social change. In 1780, Indians in Peru led by Túpac Amaru II had revolted against colonial rule and in New Spain after 1810, the independence armies consisted of a significant number of Indians. Many, however, were forced to join whichever army was controlling their region. Some criollo independence fighters promised to end Indian tribute or taxes in exchange for their participation in the war. With independence tribute was abolished, but it made little discernible improvement in the economic lives of the Native Americans.
The wars of independence lasted from 1810 to 1824. The armies of men like Simón Bolívar, José de San Martín and Antonio José de Sucre vanquished the royalists. (For more information about these, and other prominent people in Spanish American independence, see the Biographies page). As victors, the criollos were in the position to make decisions, as they had before, but after independence there was no Spanish influence. The criollos replaced the peninsulares at the top of the social pyramid. Independence meant little to the majority of the population, still excluded from the decision-making process. For instance, in order to participate in government or to hold significant offices, an individual had to be male and a property holder. Although the social order remained the same, independence did end direct influence of the Spanish monarchy in the political affairs of the colonies. However, the new political organization of Spanish America still remained undetermined.
After the wars, the newly independent Spanish American nations had to choose how to run their territories. Some, like Bolívar, at first supported the idea of a single, unified Spanish American state to be run under a constitutional democracy. Others desired the creation of separate republics with their own constitutions. In many of the new countries, no agreement could be reached because there was a general lack of recognized authority. Spanish Americans had little experience in self-government, and often affairs of state were disorganized. The disagreements and disorganization of Spanish America led to an atmosphere of anarchy and social unrest, aggravated by tensions and social divisions created by the colonial state. Eventually, these conditions would convince men like Bolívar that the best type of government for Latin America would be a strong, centralized government.
In the economic sphere, independence led to an opening of trade. Where once the colonies could only trade with Spain, now they were free to trade with all nations. The desire for free trade had been one of the causes of the independence movements. Spanish America was now open to investment, but because of the insecurity caused by the war, few wanted to invest. It was safer to import British manufactured goods that to invest capital in the production of textiles and other items. Soon British merchants, shippers, and bankers arrived. Unfortunately, this foreign influence meant that domestic manufacturing, commerce, and banking did not adequately develop.
Independence gave the criollos the opportunity to run their own affairs without European directives. It also led to disagreements about government administration and debates about which sectors of the economy (agrarian or industrial, import or export) needed support. Additionally, the commercial and financial situation in Spanish America lacked domestic investment and support. In the end, independence significantly changed the lives of only a few people. Other groups the Indians, mestizos, blacks, slaves, and mulattos saw little change in their everyday existence. Blacks slowly gained official freedoms, but they found little opportunity to better their social or economic situation. Independence left the Spanish American republics independent yet politically and economically unstable.
Brazilian Independence
Brazilian Independence came about because of changes in economic and political forces. For a number of years the Portuguese colony of Brazil had been growing in influence and economic prominence. Brazil produced vast quantities of sugar and other raw materials, but it was restricted to exporting only to Portugal. During the 18th century, there had been some talk about transferring the center of power from Lisbon to Brazil, but when Napoleon invaded Portugal in 1807, the transfer became reality. The invasion forced the Portuguese monarchy from power, and they fled to Rio de Janeiro. Both the administrative authority and the economic center of the Portuguese empire moved to Brazil. Brazilian ports opened for free trade with the entire world, and King João VI granted Brazil the same status as Portugal within the Portuguese Empire. No longer a colony, Brazil became a kingdom.
While Brazilians were happy with the recognition of their value and importance, the Portuguese in Lisbon were decidedly displeased. The Portuguese saw their economic well-being threatened and political power diminished. They revolted and demanded that King João return to Lisbon. He arrived in Lisbon in 1821 but left his son Pedro I in Brazil to rule the kingdom under a provisional constitution. However, Portuguese merchants and the military were determined to reverse the gains afforded Brazil. They wanted to return it to colonial status. The Brazilians were just as determined to retain their autonomy and their status as a kingdom. In September of 1822, when no compromise could be achieved, Pedro I declared Brazilian independence. By 1823 Brazilians secured their independence with little bloodshed.
Pedro I ruled the Brazilian Empire as the constitutional emperor. Pedro wanted to gain international recognition of Brazilian independence, so he had to placate foreign powers that demanded Brazilian debts be paid, foreign commerce be accepted, and the slave trade be abolished. However, the actions taken to comply with these demands did not please the Brazilian elite, and Pedro used increasingly dictatorial measures to institute these policies. The establishment of unpopular policies and resentment of his strong, centralized government led the Brazilian elite to depose him in 1831. His son Pedro II was only six years old at the time, so the elites appointed a regent sympathetic to their position to rule until he came of age. Pedro II assumed the throne in 1840 and ruled until the end of the Empire in 1889.
Independence in Brazil resulted in the establishment of a political system much like that of Portugal. This imperial period of Brazilian history was a stable one, marked by a conservative tendency in politics, a continuance of economic prosperity for the fazenderos and merchants, and a maintenance of the social status quo. For example, even after independence, slavery continued to remain legal in Brazil, and was not abolished until over 65 years later. It was a stable era, but change was minimal.
Results of Independence
Independence in both Spanish and Portuguese America freed the colonies of direct European control. Despite the promise of widespread change suggested by the dramatic events surrounding independence, Latin Americans built new governments on the foundations laid by Spain during the colonial period. Independence ushered in debates about political and social change. In the course of the independence movements, and the upheavals wrought through war, people fluctuated between advancing liberal reforms and bringing back the old order. Constitutions were written and rewritten, but they largely insured the continuance of the same social and political order.
Independence did open up dialogue about government, politics, and the social order, however, and people of differing viewpoints were heard more often. In a few cases, important changes were implemented: Mexico, for instance, abolished slavery in 1829. In some areas of Spanish America the traditional elements prevailed. In others, there was no resolution and political controversies ensued. Brazilians adopted a monarchical form of government complete with an emperor, hardly a revolutionary change from the Portuguese model. Mexico, by contrast, emerged from conflict, independence and a brief spell of authoritarian rule in 1824 as a federal republic.
In economic terms, Latin America benefited from the establishment of free trade, but imported foreign goods hampered the development of domestic industry. Internal and external influences also created an atmosphere of change in some aspects of the social order, particularly demanding the abolition of slavery. However, independence did not bring immediate freedom or equality to Latin America. While the elites sought to maintain the status quo and secure their positions, others sought change in the social and economic spheres. These factors would contribute to the relative instability of the first four decades of the 19th century.
Land of Diversity is a publication of the Stone Center for Latin American Studies. All rights reserved. The material of contained within this site may be reproduced for educational purposes only. For more information, please contact crcrts@tulane.edu
QUESTIONS
1. How does revolution differ from independence? Did the United States undergo a revolution in 1776? Why or why not? How did life change for the average U.S. citizen after independence? In the North? In the South? How did life change for Latin Americans?
2. Would an Indian living far from colonial cities in 1809 be easily convinced to join an independence army? Why? What would he have to gain? What might he lose? What arguments would you use to convince him to join independence forces?
3. Why do you think Spanish Americans chose not to adopt a monarchical form of government? Why did the Brazilians choose to have an emperor instead of a president?
4. Why did Spanish Americans not create a United States of South America? What might have prevented creating a large, single nation? Why did the U.S. choose to form a large union? What difficulties did the U.S. face in trying build the new nation?
5. How much do you think a mestizo living in a rural area in 1800 knew of the ideas of the Enlightenment? How much would a criollo know? What about an African slave that had just arrived? Would they know what the words "equality," "freedom," "liberty," or "constitution" meant? Which of these concepts would they understand even if the words were foreign?
Source : http://teachers.cmsfq.edu.ec/high/socialstudies/Assignments/Latin%20American%20independencec.doc
Web site link: http://teachers.cmsfq.edu.ec/
Author : not indicated on the source document of the above text
If you are the author of the text above and you not agree to share your knowledge for teaching, research, scholarship (for fair use as indicated in the United States copyrigh low) please send us an e-mail and we will remove your text quickly.
Latin American Independence
Latin American Independence
Latin American Independence
This is the right place where find the answers to your questions like :
Who ? What ? When ? Where ? Why ? Which ? How ? What does Latin American Independence mean ? Which is the meaning of Latin American Independence?
Latin American Independence history notes
Alanpedia.com from 1998 year by year new sites and innovations
Main page - Disclaimer - Contact us