Introduction: Spain was a durable developed metropolis. At the end of...

Introduction:
Spain was a durable developed metropolis. At the end of the eighteenth century, after three centuries of
imperial rule, Latin Americas still saw in their mother country an image of themselves. This empire went from
Cape Horn to California and it was divided in four virreinatos and two capitanías generales (Viceroyalty of
New Spain, Viceroyalty of New Granada, Viceroyalty of Perú, Viceroyalty of Rio de la Plata,
Captaincy−General of Guatemala and Captaincy−General of Chile).
Spanish America was an immense territory dominated by a seigneurial elite. The colonies depended on the
Spanish Navy and Spain depended on the monopoly commerce with her colonies.
Spain was ruled by Charles IV. He had a weak personality, on the contrary, he was persuaded to give all
power to Godoy who was fond of his wife. Spain was in ancien regime in which the country was controlled
by the nobility.
In this context the Napoleonic wars in Europe played a very important role in the Spanish history of the
nineteenth century. Also the British naval power broke the foreign trade between Spain and South America.
1.− International Context:
a. French Revolution:
From the sixteenth century the fabulous wealth of the Yndias had attracted the envy of other Europeans
nations, who aspired to obtain a share of it for themselves. During the eighteenth the Family Compact
between the Bourbon monarchies of Spain and French emerged as a threat to Britain.
The French Revolution introduced new political principles into international relations and, obviously, the
independence of the United States in 1783 involved a model to imitate Spanish America. This was an
opportunity for Spanish American Creole dissidents to demand independence.
In 1808 the French usurpation of the Spanish monarchy was the trigger which set in motion the movements of
separation from Spain. But Napoleon hoped that the colonies would accept the change of dynasty and the new
King Joseph I.
However, colonial opinion reacted with extreme revulsion against the French takeover, and everywhere
loyalty to the captive Buorbon Monarch Ferdinand VII was effusively proclaimed.
b. British Naval Power and the Spanish Army:
The British naval strength was successful as one of the many reasons for the independence of the Spanish
America.
In 1805 the Battle of Trafalgar was a disaster for the Spanish fleet which was completely destroyed. So the
colonies were isolated and they began to protest because their exports were blocked. In fact, at Trafalgar,
France and Spain lost twenty−three battleships. In Harding's book there are a clear tables in which we can
compare the difference between Great Britain and Spain in 1800, 1805 and 1815. We can see that Spain had
sixty−six battleships in 1800, forty battleships in 1805 and sixteen battleships in 1815. In contrast, Great
Britain had one hundred and twenty−seven battleships in 1800, one hundred and thirty−six battleships in 1805
and one hundred twenty−six in 1815. As we can see superiority of the British naval strength was significant.
So for the next ten years, the British naval strength at oceans was of superpower standard, that is the Harding's
1
conclusion: When the Napoleonic wars ended in 1815, Britain was the only global maritime power. [..] The
only other naval power whose capability showed a marked increase in the years following 1815 was the
United States.
In addition, to having suffered a grave setback in Trafalgar Cape, Spain was occupied by the French army,
and the Spanish army was unable to defence its territory. In fact, British troops and the Duke of Wellington
helped Spain. This is an example of weakness in Spanish army, so the Spanish imperial power become
seriously in doubt.
2.− Internal Situation:
a. Political:
This period is known as the crisis of the ancien regime. It dates back to 1808 and the death of Ferdinand VII
in 1833 and involves the change to the liberal regime. During those twenty−five years Spain suffered the War
of Independence (1808−1813) in her territory and two armies revolts in 1820 and 1823. Therefore we can
think that it was a chaotic situation. If we compare Spain with Britain: in Britain the power of the crown and
aristocracy had been challenged and severely reduced in the seventeenth century, freeing Parliament and the
middle class to aspire to both political and economic success. In Spain, the dead hand of a near feudal ancien
regime continued without reform and suffocated the evolution of all forms of change and modernity. It was an
inflexible, hierarchical society, dominated by the nobility who sought only to maintain a traditional rural
structure, which was organised to provide large numbers for military service rather than to facilitate increases
in production and efficiency.
The crisis of the acien regime started with the French invasion in 1808. Napoleon's troops occupied the
country. Napoleon was determined to convert Spain into a satellite state and to manage its resources. Neither
the Council of Castile nor the Junta of Government could be expected to lead a hopeless revolt against French
garrisons by disobeying Ferdinand's explicit orders. Irritated by the exactions of French intentions, the
Council, nevertheless, co−operated with Murat, the commander of the French army of occupation. At the
same time Ferdinand VII abdicated in favour of Joseph I (Napoleon's brother). On this premise it is not
difficult to imagine that the Spanish American colonies took advantage and did not recognise the new King
Joseph I.
Finally, the French army withdrew to France and Ferdinand VII returned to Madrid in 1814. But six years
later there was a liberal army revolt and the monarch was forced to accept the constitution of 1812.
Due to the liberal army revolt, the American policy of Spanish government returned the confusions of the
Cortes of Cadiz: they could neither continue despotism nor evolve a policy to reconcile liberal Spain and her
revolved colonies. It is likely that Americans would see the new policy as being better than despotism.
Meanwhile, the Holy Alliance was thinking about the possibility of sending and army of occupation to Spain
to restore the absolutism. So in 1823 the Hundred Thousand Sons of St. Louis crossed the frontier and the
Spanish generals in an attempt to secure their position, by negotiating a compromise settlement.
To sum up, we can see that the chaotic political situation could affect the independence of the Americans
colonies.
b. Economy:
The loss of the Spanish fleet at the Battle of Trafalgar and the unstable internal political situation were two
important events, which destroyed the Spanish economy. The Battle of Trafalgar was terrible for market
between Spain and her colonies. At that time a trip to Yndias was dangerous and very long so it was necessary
2
to gain protection at all times. So the Spanish fleet was temporally eliminated from the Atlantic Ocean, and
due to British naval power, Spanish commerce with Latin America was completely paralysed. Moreover, the
Spanish merchants were replaced by British ones who gained control of the Atlantic Ocean. Moreover, the
Spanish naval construction was in a very difficult situation; only after 1827 do we find examples of recovery
in some shipyards and dockyards.
However, before the Battle of Trafalgar, Spain had an economic policy that put restrictions on the
modernisation of agriculture, so too it retarded manufacturing enterprise. Choice sector industries were
reserved by the government for the grant monopoly rights. These grants were distributed according to the
political influence of their recipients, rather than their business acumen. That policy included American trade
and obtained good incomes during the sixteenth, seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. However, for seven
years after the Peace of Amiens (1802), Spanish shipping, confined in the Mediterranean, disappeared from
Atlantic Ocean. The most important port in American trade was Cadiz and during these years it suffered great
losses.
On the other hand, American ports were not closed, instead they were allowed to trade with neutral countries
because of a Crown Decree (1797). This is because a few conditions which were not observed. This was the
beginning of the end of monopoly trade with Spanish America. As Vicens Vives said: the decree of 1797
concerning permission to trade with neutral ships was prelude to the Spanish−American colonies
independence.
We can say that the main problem of the Spanish economy was the integration. In other words, Spain had to
develop its internal communications systems, permitting an increasing exchange of goods. Because, the
Spanish economy depended too much on the trade with Latin America.
Conclusion:
To finish this essay a global perspective is necessary. We should remember the significance of geography. At
that time, they did not have a good postal service they had to wait for six months to receive a letter so, it is
obvious, they did not have telephone, electronic mail The fastest transport was navigation. This is logical but
is one of the most important things to allow us understand the context. Because, when Spain decided to send a
big army to over power the Spanish American armies, it was too late to create a well trained army which
could defeat the enemy.
In addition, Spain was unstable country because it was ruled by unstable King (Ferdinand VII) who did not
have a good personality. We have to remember that Ferdinand was convinced by Napoleon to abdicate and
four years later he wanted to return to the Spanish throne.
At the beginning of the independence process, Spain had suffered a war, political disorder and disturbances so
people were confused. Moreover, the economy was a disaster and it could not support the creation of a new
army to sending it to America.
Another important question is the British naval power at the beginning of nineteenth century. In fact, some
historians said that the supremacy of the British navy was the most important role in the independence of
Latin America.
Finally, American colonies social situation brought about the fall of Spanish Empire, because only a minority
supported the Spanish government. On the contrary, most of people trust on libertadores San Martín and
Bolivar. They became national heroes.
We can conclude that the answer to the main question: Why was Spain unable to defeat the
Spanish−American movements for independence? It is a complex question. On the contrary, there are multiple
3
roles. The problem is that all the roles happened at the same time and Spain could not control the situation.
Bibliography:
CARR, R.: Spain 1808−1939, Oxford University Press, 1966.
HARDING, R.: Seapower and Naval Warfare 1650−1830, University College London Press, 1999.
KINTH: The convulsion of Europe: The Naval Conflict during the revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, in
Maritime History: The Eighteenth century and the Classic Age of Sail, Krieger Publishing Company, 1997.
LYNCH, J.: The Spanish American revolutions, 1808−1826, Weindelfeld and Nicolson, 1973.
LYNCH, J.: The origins of Spanish American Independence, in The Cambridge History of Latin America,
Cambridge University Press, 1985.
VICENS VIVES, J.: An Economic History of Spain, Princeton University Press, 1969.
WADELL: International politics and Latin American Independence, in The Cambridge History of Latin
America, Cambridge University Press, 1985.
HARDING, R.: Seapower and Naval Warfare 1650−1830, University College London Press, 1999. P.
292−294, Tables A3 and A4. There are another interesting table in page 270, Table 10.1 The balance of naval
forces, 1790−1805.
HARDING, R.: Seapower and Naval Warfare 1650−1830, University College London Press, 1999. P.
277−278.
View section: Political
CARR, R.: Spain 1808−1939, Oxford University Press, 1966.
CARR, R.: Spain 1808−1939, Oxford University Press, 1966. P. 143.
VICENS VIVES, J.: An Economic History of Spain, Princeton University Press, 1969. P. 580.
1
4
4