The Significance of Independence

Spanish empire shrunk after 1810-25.

Portuguese empire also (left more colonies)
Ibero-America, first world region colonized by
Europe (other than the Atlantic islands) was also
among the first to break from it (after?)
But what did independence mean for Latin America?

The Traditional or patriotic interpretation

Independence the most important event in the history
of the countries, the birth of the nation, the threshold
that divided the Colonial era from National history
THE history
Most books by Lat. Ame. historians dealt with it
Glorification independence movement became part of
the nation-building process, an instrument to create a
national identity in a population whose sense of
nationality was rather weak.

Identities circa 1820

Majority in Lat Ame, and most other places,
identified not with a nation but with their
community, region, or ethnic group.
During colonial period race rather than country
had been main social identifier
Amerindians, still the majority in nuclear America
identified either as Indian vis a vis whites and
blacks or more likely as members of a specific
ethnic group or local community
Blacks with their African ethnicity (a minority in
Spanish America but big in Brazil) or with
community or region, and so did mestizos

Identities circa 1820

Creoles, who led independence, had the
closest thing to a national consciousness
But this had been framed by their colonial
situation, in opposition to Spaniards
Were they Americans (the most used term
during independence period)? Mexicans?
Californios, Tejanos, Yucatecans?
What was the nation? New Spain that
stretched from Oregon to Panama? The
Viceroyalty of the River Plate?

Foundations for nation-building c. 1820

Perhaps better than in most other places thanks to
Iberian colonialisms homogenizing force
Religious unity (no sectarian struggles)
High degree of linguistic unity

But still many challenges: racial divisions;

secular/religious divide; regionalism
So history became an instrument of nation building

History as patriotic propaganda (one of the first

tools in the nation-construction toolbox)
to transform organic identities into imagined
identities
Identities based on locality and face to face
interaction
To identities in which you have to imagine that
people you do not know, have never met, and do
not have any primary connections to are your
people
That nationality is taken for granted today and
seems obvious or natural, is just an indication of
how well we have been indoctrinated

The paraphernalia of nations:

Foundational myths and symbols
1-An official Independence Day, that marks the
birth of the nation, as if it were an organism
Often an insignificant and purely symbolic day, like
Argentina's, Brazil's, U.S.
2-founding fathers (in line with the organic vision of
nations and the patriarchalism of patriotism)
3-a national song[s] (preferably bellicose and full of
hyper-virile bravado, cannons, blood, killing)

The paraphernalia of nations:

Foundational myths and symbols
Fetishized colored cloth (big in Americas?)
Sacralized texts
Coins, bills with sacralized text (e.g. in God we
Trust), symbols, and faces
National patron saint or virgin (Guadalupe,
Lujan)
Female figure (virgins, mother who sacrificed
her sons for the country, even a few warriors)

National patron saints and virgins

Santa Rosa de Lima,

Peru (plus Americas,
Philippines, Indias

Cuba: Our Lady of Charity

of El Cobre, dark skinned,
appear to 3 fishermen

Brazil: Our Lady of

Aparecida, dark virgin
appeared to 3 fishermen
1717

The paraphernalia of nations:

Foundational myths and symbols
Tribal marks (id, voting cards, passports)
National animals (& sometimes birds, insects, dogs,
mammals, fish, stones, etc.)

Latin Americans were

pioneers in the
Invention of the
symbolic
nation-building kit

Coqui. PR

Condor: Chile, Bolivia,

Ecuador, Colombia

Revisionist Interpretation of
Independence, 1960s +
Mainly in academic history
Fueled by:
1-Spread of materialist philosophy (mainly Marxism), which
emphasizes economic structures, conditions and interests
instead of ideals
2-social history with emphasis on social relations instead of
political and military events, and on common folks instead of
leaders
3-disenchantment with conditions in Latin America by the
rebellious generations that came to age during the 1960s
(interpretation of present coloring interpretation of the past)

Revisionists arguments
Little had been accomplished with independence.
For the majority of the people little had changed.
One privileged ruling group (Spaniards) had been
replaced by another elite, rather than by the people
Even the idea of Independence was questionable: one
master (Spain & Portugal) had been replaced by
another (UK in 19th cent.; US in 20th)
Colonialism had been replaced by Neo-Colonialism, in
which presumably independent Latin American
countries continued to behave as colonies exporting
raw commodities and importing manufacturing goods.

Revisionisms contributions & limits

Less romanticized & more accurate than traditional
patriotic history
Uncovered continuities hidden by the visions of
Independence as total watershed
But too presentist (imposing current concepts on past)
& too extreme in dismissal of independence as almost
irrelevant
Significance of independence, for good or bad, should
not be underestimated even if no drastic social
changes took place, even if they were wars of
Independence rather than social revolutions a la
cubana

What changed Politically:

1-elimination of legitimate political authority.
Spanish imperial rule, popular or not, was
legitimate, sanctioned and accepted by law, by
custom, by tradition, by 3 centuries of
continuity.
Now that king was gone who had the right
to rule?

How do you determine who should rule?

Brazil, presence of Braganzas (Portuguese royal family)
provides legitimacy and continuity to move smoothly from
colony to independent empire (although even here there
were regional secessionist movements)
But in Spanish America no Bourbon prince. And
monarchical experiment failed for lack of legitimacy
So Sp. Am. had to rely on republics based on elected
officials. Plenty of elections.
All with gender restriction.
Some with o property or literacy restrictions
But in general franchise more inclusive than in Europe and
at times than in US (instances of universal male suffrage)

2-Institutional breakdown
Creoles, kept out of administrative office, had
little political experience.
Difficult to hold elections when the whole
political and administrative machinery of the
empire had been destroyed (the judicial &
executive system, taxation system)
So independence brought about not only a
vacuum in legitimacy but also an institutional
break-down

3-Militarization of politics
For most of colonial period, military was an
insignificant sector.
Bourbons increased its importance during late colonial
period to defend empire from Brits, Portuguese, etc.
Wars of independence further increased importance of
armies
And the legitimacy and institutional and legitimacy
vacuum that followed independence made military
force one of the few ways to settle disputes to
determine who would rule.

4-Ruralization of politics
Colonial political power highly concentrated in
cities.
But elimination of imperial urban officials &
bureaucrats, & incapacity of central governments
to keep an official national army (because limited
revenue collection) shifted political powers to:
Caudillos, rural landlords or warlords, who rule
through through patronage, charisma, and
militias that live off the land

5-Democratization of politics?
Caudillos access to power based not on administrative
know-how, formal education, proper breeding and
connections, but on fearlessness and capacity to elicit
loyalty from rural masses
Greater opportunities and mobility for ambitious
people from humble origins
Closer connection between leader and rural masses in
terms of culture, habits, world views, basic
conservatism, that had been the case for the old
educated, urbane, and polished imperial servants or
their postcolonial counterparts, the liberal elites (what
is wrong with Kansas?)

6-Diminishing power of Church

Continuation of late colonial trend?
In spite of Bourbons restrictions of clerical
power, Catholic Church sided with Spain,
tradition and loyalty during the wars of
independence
This and liberals anticlericalism led to a
struggle against it and an erosion of its powers
during the 19th century

7-political decisions made locally

By local populations rather than imperial officials
an ocean away
Political participation, not necessarily through
elections, increased for the Creoles who had
been exclude before.
It also increased for ambitious Indians and other
non-white after the legal colonial impediments or
restrictions were limited. More than 20 Latin
American presidents during the 19th century
were of Indian or mestizo origins.

Economic impact of independence

1-Destruction, particularly in countries where war
had been most violent
2-Greater isolation from international markets
(despite claims by revisionist historians that the
new countries became neo-colonies of Britain).
Because local economies were too disrupted and
chaotic for the new republics to be profitable
colonies of Britain or anyone else.
3-Thus became more self-sufficient not more
dependent

Economic impact of independence

4- a long and arduous effort to create a
capitalist economy on the foundations of
colonial mercantilism (monopolies, guilds,
Church and Indian village lands that could not
be sold or bought)
5-half century of stagnation or decline when
most of gap with US developed. In 1810 per
capita GDP in Latin America was two-thirds of
that of the U.S. by 1870 it was less than a third

Social impact: black slaves

Little direct effect, as in US
slave trade continued until the 1850s.
Some countries (Mexico, Central American countries, Chile)
abolished slavery right after independence.
In Venezuela, Colombia, and Peru were it was more important
it was only abolished in the 1850s.
And where it was most important (in Cuba and Brazil) only in
the 1880s.
But indirectly the political rhetoric of independence, of
liberty, political equality, citizenship undermined the
ideological underpinnings of slavery (a system that was
profitable till the end)

Social impact: on Amerindians

End of colonial legal restrictions; equality before the law
But legal equality did not translate into social,
economic, or cultural equality and justice
Lost protection of Spanish imperial regulations
But political turmoil and economic stagnation provided
a sort of protection during aftermath of independence
As long as the white and mestizo government was in
disarray they were less likely to impose taxation,
conscription, and other political impositions on Indian
communities.

Social impact: on Amerindians

As long as there was no commercial incentive,
larger landowners were not going to be
interested in taking Indian lands and turning
them from independent peasants into
landless workers. On the contrary, land
ownership became more fragmented.
But this protection from market forces was
going to wither away with economic recovery
after the middle of the century.

Social impact on Amerindians

In Argentina and Chile, where Indian population was
semi nomadic, similar to U.S. they continued to be
outside of white control also until the second half of
the 19th century.

Overall, socially, Latin America experienced in its

postcolonial period a slow transition from the caste
society of colonial times, where social position
regulated and fixed by law to a class society, more
open, more competitive and sometimes more
exploitative than colonial society.