Liberation from

Liberation fromColonial
ColonialRule-
Rule-Latin
LatinAmerica:
America:Part
PartII II– –SELF
SELF
STUDY HISTORY

Liberation from Colonial Rule- Latin America: Part II

Mexico and Central America

The independence of Mexico, like that of Peru, the other major central area of Spain’s American empire, came
late.
As was the case in Lima, Mexican cities had a powerful segment of Creoles and peninsular Spaniards whom the
old imperial system had served well.

Mexican Creoles, like those in Peru, had the spectre of a major social uprising to persuade them to cling to
Spain and stability for a while longer.
For many of the powerful in Mexican society, a break with Spain promised mainly a loss of traditional status
and power and possibly social revolution.

What was unique to the Mexican case was that the popular rebellion that exploded in 1810 was actually the first
major call for independence in the region.
Between 1808 and 1810, peninsulars had acted aggressively to preserve Spain’s power in the region.

Rejecting the notion of a congress that would address the question of governance in the absence of the
Spanish king, leading peninsulars in Mexico City deposed the viceroy and persecuted Creoles.
They then welcomed weaker viceroys whom they knew they could dominate.
Peninsulars’ efforts could not, however, prevent the emergence of an independence struggle.

In 1810 the Bajio region produced a unique movement led by a radical priest, Miguel Hidalgo.

When officials discovered the conspiracy that Hidalgo and other Creoles had been planning, the priest
appealed directly to the indigenous and mestizo populace.
In 1810 he gave the famous speech, “The Cry of Dolores”, calling upon the people to protect the interest of
their King Fernando VII (held captive by Napoleon) by revolting against the European-born Spaniards who
had overthrown the Spanish Viceroy.
A rich agricultural and mining zone, the Bajio had recently undergone difficult economic times that hit those
rural and urban workers particularly hard.

Hidalgo had tried to help the poor by showing them how to grow olives and grapes, but in Mexico,
growing these crops was discouraged or prohibited by the authorities due to Spanish imports of the
items.

Thus many of them responded eagerly to Hidalgo’s call. Although framed as an appeal for resistance to the
peninsulars, it was in effect a call for independence.
 The enthusiasm that Hidalgo stirred among Indians and mestizos shocked and frightened both Creole and
peninsular elites.
Hidalgo’s untrained army grew to have some 80,000 members as it conquered towns and larger cities and
ultimately threatened Mexico City itself. They attacked the persons and property of peninsular and Creole
elites.
The movement for independence was becoming a race and class war.
Perhaps fearing the atrocities his troops might commit there, Hidalgo prevented the movement from
entering Mexico City.
Shortly afterward troops of the viceregal government caught up with the rebels. After a dramatic military
defeat, Hidalgo was captured in early 1811 and executed.

The death of its first leader did not mean the end of Mexico’s first independence campaign. Soon another priest,
the mestizo Morelos, took over the reins of the movement.

Under Morelos the rebellion gained clearer objectives of independence and social and economic reform as
well as greater organization and a wider social base.
With the defeat and death of Morelos in 1815, the potential national scope of the movement came to an
effective end.

Although smaller forces under leaders like Vicente Guerrero and Guadalupe Victoria (Manuel Félix Fernández)
continued to harass the powerful through guerrilla warfare in several regions, the popular movement for
independence in Mexico was no longer a grave threat to elite power.
Final independence, in fact, was not the result of the efforts of Hidalgo, Morelos, or the forces that had made up
their independence drive.

It came instead as a conservative initiative led by military officers, merchants, and the Roman Catholic
Church.
The liberals who carried out the 1820 revolt in Spain intended to eliminate the special privileges of the
church and the military.
Anxious over that threat to the strength of two of the pillars of the Mexican government and newly confident
in their ability to keep popular forces in check, Creoles turned against Spanish rule in 1820–21.

Two figures from the early rebellion played central roles in liberating Mexico.

One, Guerrero, had been an insurgent chief; the other, Iturbide, had been an officer in the campaign against
the popular independence movement.
The two came together behind an agreement known as the Iguala Plan.

Centred on provisions of independence, respect for the church, and equality between Mexicans and
peninsulars, the plan gained the support of many Creoles, Spaniards, and former rebels.

As royal troops defected to Iturbide’s cause, the new Spanish administrator was soon forced to accept the
inevitability of Mexican independence.
 A year later, in 1822, Iturbide engineered his own coronation as Agustin I, Emperor of Mexico.

In 1823, a revolt that included the former insurgent Guadalupe Victoria (who, like Guerrero, had abandoned the
cause of a popular independence) cut short Iturbide’s tenure as monarch.

The consequences of that overthrow extended from Mexico through Central America.
In Mexico the rebellion ushered in a republic and introduced Santa Anna, who occupied a central place in
the nation’s politics for several decades.
The provinces of the Kingdom of Guatemala—which included the nations of Guatemala, El Salvador,
Honduras, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica—had adhered to Iturbide’s Mexico by 1822.

These Central American provinces split off from Mexico in the wake of Iturbide’s fall.
They formed a federation, the United Provinces of Central America, which held together only until 1838,
when regionalism led to the creation of separate countries in the region.

Brazil

Colonisation of Brazil

The land now called Brazil was claimed by Portugal in April 1500, on the arrival of the Portuguese fleet the
second Portuguese India Armada, commanded by Cabral on the Bahian shores.
The Portuguese encountered Indigenous nations divided into several tribes.
Although the Portuguese sailors stayed for only nine days, the indigenous people soon became fascinated by the
iron tools used, the Catholic mass service observance and the alcoholic beverages that they observed.
Because of this perceived interest in the Roman Catholic religion, the Portuguese assumed that these ones would
quickly convert to Christianity once educated.
Still, Portugal did not really appreciate the value of Brazil, since their imports came mainly from India and the Far
East.

It was only the New Christian (who were converted Jews) investors that were scouting and defending the
coast.
These ones traded in brazilwood and would share their monopoly contracts with the Portuguese king.
The king would then allow private investors to conquer certain areas for their own benefit, but at their own
costs.
This led to a combination of royal and private ownership.

It was not long before other European nations wanted the opportunity to conquer and occupy parts of Brazil.

Brazilwood provided a rich red dye, which was valuable in the colouring of textiles and clothing.
The French and Spanish made repeated efforts at entering Brazil.
The Portuguese fought determinedly against their invasion, dispatching strong fleets to clear the coast.
Another one of its efforts was to establish permanent settlements. The first of these was Sao Vicente,
established in 1532.
Though the first settlement was founded in 1532, colonization was effectively started in 1534, when Dom Joao III
divided the territory into fifteen hereditary captaincies. This arrangement proved problematic, however, and in
1549 the king assigned a Governor-General to administer the entire colony.

The Portuguese had established a management culture of violent domination and abuse in India.

However, this did not go down well with Brazilian locals, who captured and ate their Portuguese ‘owners’ in
complex ceremonies.
This forced the Portuguese king to listen to the warnings of the indigenous folk and assume direct control.

Sousa was made the first Governor General of Brazil in 1549 and reigned until 1553.

By order of the king, Sousa declared Salvador the capital city.

Sousa then went about declaring war on the indigenous people to decrease the threat posed upon the
country by the French (who planned to cooperate with the locals for increased power).
This Governor General was an integral motivator for building towns, sugar mills and important buildings.
Later, the crown had ordered Sousa to treat the locals well, with the aim of converting them to Christianity.
Anyone that did not convert could be enslaved.

As the groups began to intermingle, so did the cultures and genes.

Colonists adopted as much of the Brazilian culture as the indigenous ones did the European culture.
As the crown and bishop of Portugal underwent renewal, the concept of slavery was no longer approved of,
and the numbers of slaves in Brazil dropped drastically.
The Portuguese assimilated some of the native tribes while others slowly disappeared in long wars or by
European diseases to which they had no immunity.

In 1562 and 1563, smallpox, measles and the flu struck the local people, annihilating huge proportions of their
population numbers. This was followed by a famine.

The locals were desperate for food and any sort of income, which led them to sell themselves as slaves,
rather than to die of starvation.

Investors were required for portions of land as well as for sugar mills, and so on.

Portuguese colonisers also needed to establish and maintain positive working relationships with the locals.
Centuries later, sugar would become the agricultural and financial pillar of Brazil.

Towards the end of the 1500’s, the ‘Indians’ fled to the interior parts of Brazils to escape the colonial elements.
So, the European settlers imported slaves from Africa.
By the mid-16th century, sugar had become Brazil’s most important export due to the increasing international
demand for sugar.

To profit from the situation, by 1700, over 963,000 African slaves had been brought across the Atlantic to
work in Brazil.
More Africans were brought to Brazil up until that date than to all the other places in the Americas combined.
 Through wars against the French, the Portuguese slowly expanded their territory to the southeast, taking Rio de
Janeiro in 1567, and to the northwest, taking São Luís in 1615.

They sent military expeditions to the Amazon rainforest and conquered English and Dutch strongholds.
In 1680 they reached the far south and founded Sacramento (present-day Uruguay).

At the end of the 17th century, sugar exports started to decline but beginning in the 1690s, the discovery of gold
by explorers in the region that would later be called Minas Gerais (General Mines), saved the colony from
imminent collapse.

From all over Brazil, as well as from Portugal, thousands of immigrants came to the mines.

In 1775, the three colonies of Portuguese America (the State of Brazil, the State of Maranhao and Piaui; and the
State of Grao-Para and Rio Negro) were united into a singular colony, under the State of Brazil.

This arrangement would last until the end of Colonial Brazil.

As a result, Brazil did not split into several countries, as happened to its Spanish-speaking neighbors.

The Spanish tried to prevent Portuguese expansion into the territory that belonged to them according to the
1494 Treaty of Tordesillas, and succeeded in conquering the Uruguay in 1777.

However, this was in vain as another Treaty signed in the same year settled territorial disputes.
Based on the terms of the agreement, Spain ceded territories in Brazil to Portugal (i.e. Amazon Basin) in
return for maintaining control over the Uruguay).
It confirmed Portuguese sovereignty over all lands proceeding from its territorial expansion, thus creating
most of the current Brazilian borders.

From colony to United Kingdom:

During the invasion of Portugal (1807), by Napoleon France, the Portuguese royal family fled to Brazil,
establishing Rio de Janeiro as the de facto capital of Portugal.
This had the side effect of creating within Brazil many of the institutions required to exist as an independent
state; most importantly, it freed Brazil to trade with other nations at will.
After Napoleon’s army was finally defeated in 1815, in order to maintain the capital in Brazil and allay
Brazilian fears of being returned to colonial status, King John VI of Portugal raised the de jure status of Brazil
to an equal, integral part of a United Kingdom of Portugal, Brazil, and the Algarves, rather than a mere
colony, a status which it enjoyed for the next seven years.

Liberation from Colonial Rule of Brazil

Brazil’s independence, in particular, shared a common starting point with Spanish America’s, since both conflicts
were triggered by Napoleon’s invasion of the Iberian Peninsula, which forced the Portuguese royal family to
resettle in Brazil in 1807.
Brazil gained its independence with little of the violence that marked similar transitions in Spanish America.
Conspiracies against Portuguese rule during 1788–98 showed that some groups in Brazil had already been
contemplating the idea of independence in the late 18th century.

Moreover, the reforms of the second half of the 18th century, Portugal’s attempt to overhaul the administration of
its overseas possessions, were an inconvenience to many in the colony.
Still, the impulse toward independence was less powerful in Brazil than in Spanish America.

Portugal, with more limited financial, human, and military resources than Spain, had never ruled its
American subjects with as heavy a hand as its Iberian neighbour.
Portugal neither enforced commercial monopolies as strictly nor excluded the American-born from high
administrative positions as widely as did Spain.
Many Brazilian-born and Portuguese elites had received the same education.
Their economic interests also tended to overlap.

The reliance of the Brazilian upper classes on African slavery, finally, favoured their continued ties to
Portugal.
Plantation owners depended on the African slave trade, which Portugal controlled, to provide workers
for the colony’s main economic activities.

The size of the resulting slave population—approximately half the total Brazilian population in 1800—also
meant that Creoles shied away from political initiatives that might mean a loss of control over their social
inferiors.

The key step in the relatively bloodless end of colonial rule in Brazil was the transfer of the Portuguese court from
Lisbon to Rio de Janeiro in 1808.

The arrival of the court transformed Brazil in ways that made its return to colony status impossible.
The unprecedented concentration of economic and administrative power in Rio de Janeiro brought a new
integration to Brazil.
The emergence of that capital as a large and increasingly sophisticated urban centre also expanded markets
for Brazilian manufactures and other goods.
Even more important to the development of manufacturing in Brazil was one of the first acts undertaken
there by the Portuguese ruler, Prince Regent John: the removal of old restrictions on manufacturing.

Another of his enactments, the opening of Brazilian ports to direct trade with friendly countries, was
less helpful to local manufacturers, but it further contributed to Brazil’s emergence as a metropolis.

Brazil headed into a political crisis when groups in Portugal tried to reverse the metropolitanization of their
former colony.
With the end of the Napoleonic Wars came calls for John to return to Lisbon.

At first, he demurred and in 1815 even raised Brazil to the status of kingdom, legally equal to Portugal within
the empire that he ruled.
The situation was a difficult one for John (after 1816 King John VI). If he moved back to Lisbon, he might lose
Brazil, but if he remained in Rio, he might well lose Portugal.
 Finally, after liberal revolts in Lisbon in 1820, the Portuguese demands became too strong for him to resist.
In a move that ultimately facilitated Brazil’s break with Portugal, John sailed for Lisbon in 1821 but left his
son Dom Pedro behind as prince regent.

It was Dom Pedro who, at the urging of local elites, oversaw the final emergence of an independent Brazil.

Matters were pushed toward that end by Portuguese reaction against the rising power of their former colony.
Although the government constituted by the liberals after 1820 allowed Brazilian representation in a Cortes, it
was clear that Portugal now wanted to reduce Brazil to its previous colonial condition, endangering all the
concessions and powers the Brazilian elite had won.
By late 1821 the situation was becoming unbearable. The Cortes now demanded that Dom Pedro return to
Portugal. As his father had advised him to do, the prince instead declared his intention to stay in Brazil in a
speech known as the “Fico” (“I am staying”).
When Pedro proclaimed its independence on Sept. 7, 1822, and subsequently became its first emperor, Brazil’s
progression from Portuguese colony to autonomous country was complete.
There was some armed resistance from Portuguese garrisons in Brazil, but the struggle was brief.
Independence still did not come without a price. Over the next 25 years Brazil suffered a series of regional revolts,
some lasting as long as a decade and costing tens of thousands of lives.
Dom Pedro I was forced from his throne in 1831, to be succeeded by his son, Dom Pedro II.
The break with Portugal did not itself, however, produce the kind of disruption and devastation that plagued
much of the former Spanish America.
With its territory and economy largely intact, its government headed by a prince of the traditional royal family,
and its society little changed, Brazil enjoyed continuities that made it extraordinarily stable in comparison with
most of the other new states in the region.

1. What reasons are responsible for Latin America being beset with chronic political instability and endemic
military conflicts throughout most of the 19th century?
Ans:

Brief background of Latin American Countries and their independence

Napoleon’s invasion of Spain in 1808 was the event that triggered the struggle for Latin America’s
independence from Spain.

Napoleon detained Charles IV, the king of Spain, and delivered the crown of Spain to his own brother, Joseph
which produced crisis in the Americas.

The Spanish colonies were, strictly speaking, kingdoms in their own right, constitutionally distinct from Spain but
sharing a common monarch. When the monarchy in Spain suddenly lost its legitimacy when Bonaparte took
over, colonies wanted independence.
Simon Bolivar was a Venezuelan military leader who was instrumental in the revolutions against the Spanish
empire in Latin American colonies and saw the opportunity to take advantage of the problems occurring in Spain.
He led the independence movement against Spanish rule for six nations; Venezuela, Columbia, Panama,
Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia. Bolivar was hailed as El Libertador (The Liberator) and was himself involved into
many battles. Bolivar was intrigued by the French and American Revolutions and familiar with the ideas of
Enlightenment.
 Most of Latin America achieved its independence by 1825.

Chronic political instability and endemic military conflicts in Latin America in 19th Century

Gran Colombia (1819 – 1831):

The state included the territories of present-day Colombia, Ecuador, Panama and Venezuela and parts of
northern Peru, Western Guyana and north western Brazil.
Bolivar, an unwavering republican, after witnessing the anarchy in New Granada, had determined that
republicanism in South America could not follow the North American model.
Bolivar believed that the South American societies had been kept in a condition of political immaturity
through “Spanish tyranny”, and, therefore, were unqualified to handle an electoral democracy.
In his Jamaica Letter of September 6, 1815, he discussed his ideas for American independence, and he
stated that South America should ‘not adopt the best system of government, but the one that is most likely
to succeed.”
Bolivar had hoped to unite some of the countries of South America, similar to the United States to be known
as Gran Colombia.

For this reason, and to prevent a break-up, Bolívar sought to implement a more centralist model of
government in Gran Colombia, which included a lifetime presidency with the ability to select a
successor.
He dreamed of a united Spanish America and in the pursuit of that purpose he not only created Gran
Colombia but also the Confederation of the Andes whose aim was to unite the aforementioned with
Peru and Bolivia.
Moreover, he promoted a network of treaties keeping the newly liberated South American countries
together.

Nonetheless, he was unable to control the centrifugal forces which pushed outwards in all directions.
Bolivar faced opposition from internal factions due to regional differences throughout the huge Gran
Colombia. Bolivar ultimately failed in his attempt to prevent the collapse of the union.
Bolivar was disappointed and lamented “those who have served the revolution have ploughed the sea.”
Gran Colombia was dissolved in 1831 due to:

the political differences that existed between supporters of federalism and centralism, and
regional tensions among the peoples that made up the republic.

It broke into the successor states of Colombia, Ecuador, and Venezuela.

New Granada (1831 – 1858):

It was created after dissolution of Gran Columbia.

It was a centralist unitary republic consisting primarily of present-day Colombia and Panama with smaller
portions of today’s Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Venezuela and Peru.
In 1851, a civil war broke out when conservative and pro-slavery groups revolted against liberal president
Jose Hilario Lopez, in an attempt to prevent emancipation of disenfranchised groups and abolishment of
 slavery, in addition to a number of religious issues.
New Granada was transformed in 1858 to the Granadine Confederation as an answer to demands for a
decentralized country.

Granadine Confederation (1858 – 1863):

It consisted of the present-day nations of Colombia and Panama and parts of northwestern Brazil.
It was a pro-federalist confederation as it gave more autonomy to provinces.
The life of the confederation was marked by rivalry between the conservative party and the Liberal
party, which ended in a Civil War (1860–1862).
It also was a period of hostility against the Roman Catholic Church, and of divided regionalism.

Federalists Vs Centrists:

Domestic wars were often fought between federalists and centrists who ended up asserting themselves
through the military repression of their opponents at the expense of civilian political life.

Cultural and Class divisions:

The new nations inherited the cultural diversity of the colonial era and strived to create a new identity based
around the shared European (Spanish or Portuguese) language and culture.
Within each country, however, there were cultural and class divisions that created tension and hurt national
unity.
Independence also created a new, self-consciously “Latin American” ruling class and intelligentsia
which at times avoided Spanish and Portuguese models in their quest to reshape their societies.
This elite looked towards other Catholic European models—in particular France—for a new Latin American
culture, but did not seek input from indigenous peoples.

Conflict in order to access resources:

In many areas the borders were unstable, since the new states fought wars with each other to gain access to
resources, especially in the second half of the nineteenth century.

Some of the important Wars:

Paraguayan War (1864–70; also known as the War of the Triple Alliance):

The Paraguayan War pitted Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay against Paraguay, which was utterly
defeated.
As a result, Paraguay suffered a demographic collapse: the population went from an estimated 525,000
persons in 1864 to 221,000 in 1871 and out of this last population, only around 28,000 were men.

War of the Pacific (1879–84):

In the War of the Pacific, Chile defeated the combined forces of Bolivia and Peru.
Chile gained control of saltpeter-rich areas, previously controlled by Peru and Bolivia, and Bolivia
 became a land-locked nation.

Popular insurrections were often influential and repressed:

100,000 were killed during the suppression of a Colombian revolt between 1899 and 1902 during the
Thousand Days’ War.

Mexican–American War (1846–48),

Mexico lost over half of its territory to the United States.

In the 1860s, France attempted to indirectly control Mexico.

In South America, Brazil consolidated its control of large swaths of the Amazon Basin at the expense of
its neighbors.
In the 1880s, the United States implemented an aggressive policy to defend and expand its political and
economic interests in all of Latin America, which culminated in the creation of the Pan-American
Conference, the successful completion of the Panama Canal and the United States intervention in the final
Cuban war of independence.

Gap between rich and poor:

The export of natural resources provided the basis of most Latin American economies in the nineteenth
century, which allowed for the development of wealthy elite.
The restructuring of colonial economic and political realities resulted in a sizable gap between rich and poor,
with landed elites controlling the vast majority of land and resources.

Emergence of Caudillos (military chiefs):

The endemic political instability and the nature of the economy resulted in the emergence of caudillos,
military chiefs whose hold on power depended on their military skill and ability to dispense patronage.
The political regimes were at least in theory democratic and took the form of either presidential or
parliamentary governments. Both were prone to being taken over by a caudillo or an oligarchy.

Conservatives Vs Liberals:

The political landscape was occupied by conservatives, who believed that the preservation of the old social
hierarchies served as the best guarantee of national stability and prosperity, and liberals, who sought to
bring about progress by freeing up the economy and individual initiative.

Some states did manage to have some of democracy: Uruguay, and partially Argentina, Chile, Costa Rica and Colombia.
The others were clearly oligarchist or authoritarian. All of these regimes sought to maintain Latin America’s lucrative
position in the world economy as a provider of raw materials.