latin american revolutions assignment quizlet

Change in the Americas

The south american revolutions, the spread of revolution.

The Latin American Wars of Independence, which took place during the late 18th and early 19th centuries, were deeply influenced by the American and French Revolutions and resulted in the creation of a number of independent countries in Latin America.

Learning Objectives

Relate the South American Revolutions to the American and French Revolutions

Key Takeaways

• The revolutionary fervor of the 18th century, influenced by Enlightenment ideals of liberty and equality, resulted in massive political upheaval across the world, starting with the American Revolution in 1776 and the French Revolution in 1789.
• The principles expounded by the revolutionaries in Europe and their political success in overthrowing the autocratic rule of the monarchy inspired similar movements in Latin America, first in Haiti (then the French colony of Saint Domingue), whose revolution began just two years after the start of the French Revolution.
• At first, the white settler-colonists were inspired by the French Revolution to gain independent control over their colonies, but soon the revolution became centered on a slave-led rebellion against slavery and colonization, a trend that would continue throughout the America with varying degrees of success.
• Soon after the French Revolution and its resulting political instability, Napoleon Bonaparte took power, further destabilizing the Latin American colonies and leading to more revolution.
• The Peninsular War, which resulted from the Napoleonic occupation of Spain, caused Spanish Creoles in Spanish America to question their allegiance to Spain, stoking independence movements that culminated in the wars of independence, which lasted almost two decades.
• At the time of the wars of independence, there was discussion of creating a regional state or confederation of Latin American nations to protect the area’s new autonomy, but after several projects failed, the issue was not taken up again until the late 19th century.
• Libertadores : Refers to the principal leaders of the Latin American wars of independence from Spain and Portugal. They are named in contrast with the Conquistadors, who were so far the only Spanish/Portuguese peoples recorded in the South American history. They were largely bourgeois criollos (local-born people of European, mostly of Spanish or Portuguese, ancestry) influenced by liberalism and in most cases with military training in the metropole (mother country).
• Napoleonic wars : A series of major conflicts pitting the French Empire and its allies, led by Napoleon I, against a fluctuating array of European powers formed into various coalitions, primarily led and financed by the United Kingdom. The wars resulted from the unresolved disputes associated with the French Revolution and the Revolutionary Wars, which raged for years before concluding with the Treaty of Amiens in 1802. The resumption of hostilities the following year paved the way for more than a decade of constant warfare. These wars had profound consequences for global and European history, leading to the spread of nationalism and liberalism, the rise of the British Empire as the world’s premier power, the independence movements in Latin America and the collapse of the Spanish Empire, the fundamental reorganization of German and Italian territories into larger states, and the establishment of radically new methods in warfare.
• Haitian Revolution : A successful anti-slavery and anti-colonial insurrection that took place in the former French colony of Saint Domingue from 1791 until 1804. It affected the institution of slavery throughout the Americas. Self-liberated slaves destroyed slavery at home, fought to preserve their freedom, and with the collaboration of mulattoes, founded the sovereign state of Haiti.

The Latin American Wars of Independence were the revolutions that took place during the late 18th and early 19th centuries and resulted in the creation of a number of independent countries in Latin America. These revolutions followed the American and French Revolutions, which had profound effects on the Spanish, Portuguese, and French colonies in the Americas. Haiti, a French slave colony, was the first to follow the United States to independence during the Haitian Revolution, which lasted from 1791 to 1804. From this Napoleon Bonaparte emerged as French ruler, whose armies set out to conquer Europe, including Spain and Portugal, in 1808.

The Peninsular War, which resulted from the Napoleonic occupation of Spain, caused Spanish Creoles in Spanish America to question their allegiance to Spain, stoking independence movements that culminated in the wars of independence, lasting almost two decades. The crisis of political legitimacy in Spain with the Napoleonic invasion sparked reaction in Spain’s overseas empire. The outcome in Spanish America was that most of the region achieved political independence and instigated the creation of sovereign nations. The areas that were most recently formed as viceroyalties were the first to achieve independence, while the old centers of Spanish power in Mexico and Peru with strong and entrenched institutions and the elites were the last to achieve independence. The two exceptions were the islands of Cuba and Puerto Rico, which along with the Philippines remained Spanish colonies until the 1898 Spanish-America War. At the same time, the Portuguese monarchy relocated to Brazil during Portugal’s French occupation. After the royal court returned to Lisbon, the prince regent, Pedro, remained in Brazil and in 1822 successfully declared himself emperor of a newly independent Brazil.

Spanish America: Hope for a Unified Latin America

The chaos of the Napoleonic wars in Europe cut the direct links between Spain and its American colonies, allowing decolonization to begin.

During the Peninsula War, Napoleon installed his brother Joseph Bonaparte on the Spanish Throne and captured King Fernando VII. Several assemblies were established after 1810 by the Criollos to recover the sovereignty and self-government based in Seven-Part Code and restore the laws of Castilian succession to rule the lands in the name of Ferdinand VII of Spain.

This experience of self-government, along with the influence of Liberalism and the ideas of the French and American Revolutions, brought about a struggle for independence led by the Libertadores . The territories freed themselves, often with help from foreign mercenaries and privateers. United States, Europe and the British Empire were neutral, aiming to achieve political influence and trade without the Spanish monopoly.

In South America, Simón Bolívar and José de San Martín led the final phase of the independence struggle. Although Bolívar attempted to keep the Spanish-speaking parts of the continent politically unified, they rapidly became independent of one another as well, and several further wars were fought, such as the Paraguayan War and the War of the Pacific. At the time, there was discussion of creating a regional state or confederation of Latin American nations to protect the area’s newly won autonomy. After several projects failed, the issue was not taken up again until the late 19th century.

A related process took place in Spain’s North and Central American colonies with the Mexican War of Independence and related struggles. Independence was achieved in 1821 by a coalition uniting under Agustín de Iturbide and the Army of the Three Guarantees. Unity was maintained for a short period under the First Mexican Empire, but within a decade the region had also split into various nations.

In 1898, in the Greater Antilles, the United States won the Spanish-American War and occupied Cuba and Puerto Rico, ending Spanish territorial control in the Americas.

Impact of the French Revolution: Haiti

The Haitian Revolution was a successful anti-slavery and anti-colonial insurrection that took place in the former French colony of Saint Domingue from 1791 until 1804. It affected the institution of slavery throughout the Americas. Self-liberated slaves destroyed slavery at home, fought to preserve their freedom, and with the collaboration of mulattoes, founded the sovereign state of Haiti.

From the beginning of colonization, white colonists and black slaves frequently came into violent conflict. The French Revolution, which began in 1789, shaped the course of the ongoing conflict in Saint-Domingue and was at first welcomed in the island. In France, the National Assembly made radical changes in French laws, and on August 26, 1789, published the Declaration of the Rights of Man, declaring all men free and equal. Wealthy whites saw it as an opportunity to gain independence from France, which would allow elite plantation-owners to take control of the island and create trade regulations that would further their own wealth and power. There were so many twists and turns in the leadership in France and so many complex events in Saint-Domingue that various classes and parties changed their alignments many times. However, the Haitian Revolution quickly became a test of the ideology of the French Revolution, as it radicalized the slavery question and forced French leaders to recognize the full meaning of their revolution.

The African population on the island began to hear of the agitation for independence by the rich European planters, the grands blancs, who resented France’s limitations on the island’s foreign trade. The Africans mostly allied with the royalists and the British, as they understood that if Saint-Domingue’s independence were to be led by white slave masters, it would probably mean even harsher treatment and increased injustice for the African population. The plantation owners would be free to operate slavery as they pleased without the existing minimal accountability to their French peers.

Saint-Domingue’s free people of color, most notably Julien Raimond, had been actively appealing to France for full civil equality with whites since the 1780s. Raimond used the French Revolution to make this the major colonial issue before the National Assembly of France. In October 1790, Vincent Ogé, another wealthy free man of color from the colony, returned home from Paris, where he had been working with Raimond. Convinced that a law passed by the French Constituent Assembly gave full civil rights to wealthy men of color, Ogé demanded the right to vote. When the colonial governor refused, Ogé led a brief insurgency in the area around Cap Français. He and an army of around 300 free blacks fought to end racial discrimination in the area. He was captured in early 1791, and brutally executed by being “broken on the wheel” before being beheaded. Ogé was not fighting against slavery, but his treatment was cited by later slave rebels as one of the factors in their decision to rise up in August 1791 and resist treaties with the colonists. The conflict up to this point was between factions of whites and between whites and free blacks. Enslaved blacks watched from the sidelines.

The Revolution in Haiti did not wait on the Revolution in France. The individuals in Haiti relied on no resolution but their own. The call for modification of society was influenced by the revolution in France, but once the hope for change found a place in the hearts of the Haitian people, there was no stopping the radical reformation that was occurring. The Enlightenment ideals and the initiation of the French Revolution were enough to inspire the Haitian Revolution, which evolved into the most successful and comprehensive slave rebellion. Just as the French were successful in transforming their society, so were the Haitians. On April 4, 1792, The French National Assembly granted freedom to slaves in Haiti and the revolution culminated in 1804; Haiti was an independent nation comprised solely of free people. The activities of the revolutions sparked change across the world. France’s transformation was most influential in Europe, and Haiti’s influence spanned across every location that continued to practice slavery. John E. Baur honors Haiti as home of the most influential revolution in history.

Haitian Revolution: Battle at San Domingo, a painting by January Suchodolski, depicting a struggle between Polish troops in French service and the slave rebels and freed revolutionary soldiers.

Simón Bolívar

Simón Bolívar was a Venezuelan military and political leader who played a leading role in the Latin American wars of independence and was a major proponent of a unified Latin America.

Recall Simón Bolívar and his contributions to South American independence movements

• The military and political career of Simón Bolívar, which included both formal service in the armies of various revolutionary regimes and actions organized by himself or in collaboration with other exiled patriot leaders from 1811 to 1830, was important in the success of the independence wars in South America.
• These wars, often under the leadership of Bolívar, resulted in the creation of several South American states out of the former Spanish colonies: the currently existing Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia, and the now-defunct Gran Colombia.
• Bolívar first found success in his native Venezuela, taking advantage of the instability caused by Napoleon’s Peninsular War and leading the revolutionary forces to a victory in 1821, which resulted in the creation of an independent Venezuela.
• Throughout his military career, he also lead efforts to oust Spanish rulers from Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia.
• Bolívar was passionate about the creation of a unified Latin America, through military and economic alliances and various confederations to protect the area’s newly won autonomy, but in the end, nationalistic enterprises won out.
• Peninsular War : A military conflict between Napoleon’s empire and the allied powers of Spain, Britain, and Portugal for control of the Iberian Peninsula during the Napoleonic Wars. The war started when French and Spanish armies invaded and occupied Portugal in 1807, and escalated in 1808 when France turned on Spain, its previous ally. The war on the peninsula lasted until the Sixth Coalition defeated Napoleon in 1814, and is regarded as one of the first wars of national liberation, significant for the emergence of large-scale guerrilla warfare.
• Creole : A social class in the hierarchy of the overseas colonies established by Spain in the 16th century, especially in Hispanic America, comprising the locally born people of confirmed European (primarily Spanish) ancestry. Although they were legally Spaniards, in practice, they ranked below the Iberian-born Peninsulares. Nevertheless, they had preeminence over all the other populations: Amerindians, enslaved Africans, and people of mixed descent.
• caudillismo : A cultural and political phenomenon first appearing during the early 19th century in revolutionary Spanish America, characterized by a military land owners who possessed political power, charismatic personalities, and populist politics and created authoritarian regimes in Latin American nations.
• Gran Colombia : A name used today for the state that encompassed much of northern South America and part of southern Central America from 1819 to 1831. It included the territories of present-day Colombia, Venezuela, Ecuador, Panama, northern Peru, western Guyana, and northwest Brazil.

El Libertador : Simón Bolívar

Simón Bolívar (July 24, 1783 – December 17, 1830) was a Venezuelan military and political leader who played a key role in the establishment of Venezuela, Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and Panama as sovereign states independent of Spanish rule.

Bolívar was born into a wealthy, aristocratic Creole family and like others of his day was educated abroad at a young age, arriving in Spain when he was 16 and later moving to France. While in Europe, he was introduced to the ideas of Enlightenment philosophers, which gave him the ambition to replace the Spanish as rulers. Taking advantage of the disorder in Spain prompted by the Peninsular War, Bolívar began his campaign for Venezuelan independence in 1808, appealing to the wealthy Creole population through a conservative process, and established an organized national congress within three years. Despite a number of hindrances, including the arrival of an unprecedentedly large Spanish expeditionary force, the revolutionaries eventually prevailed, culminating in a patriot victory at the Battle of Carabobo in 1821 that effectively made Venezuela an independent country.

Following this triumph over the Spanish monarchy, Bolívar participated in the foundation of the first union of independent nations in Latin America, Gran Colombia, of which he was president from 1819 to 1830. Through further military campaigns, he ousted Spanish rulers from Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia (which was named after him). He was simultaneously president of Gran Colombia (current Venezuela, Colombia, Panamá, and Ecuador) and Peru, while his second in command Antonio José de Sucre was appointed president of Bolivia. He aimed at a strong and united Spanish America able to cope not only with the threats emanating from Spain and the European Holy Alliance but also with the emerging power of the United States. At the peak of his power, Bolívar ruled over a vast territory from the Argentine border to the Caribbean Sea.

In his 21-year career, Bolívar faced two main challenges. First was gaining acceptance as undisputed leader of the republican cause. Despite claiming such a role since 1813, he began to achieve acceptance only in 1817, and consolidated his hold on power after his dramatic and unexpected victory in New Granada in 1819. His second challenge was implementing a vision to unify the region into one large state, which he believed (and most would agree, correctly) would be the only guarantee of maintaining American independence from the Spanish in northern South America. His early experiences under the First Venezuelan Republic and in New Granada convinced him that divisions among republicans, augmented by federal forms of government, only allowed Spanish American royalists to eventually gain the upper hand. Once again, it was his victory in 1819 that gave him the leverage to bring about the creation of a unified state, Gran Colombia, with which to oppose the Spanish Monarchy on the continent.

Bolívar is, along with Argentine General José de San Martín, considered one of the great heroes of the Hispanic independence movements of the early 19th century.

Simón Bolívar: A portait of Simón Bolívar by Arturo Michelena. Bolívar is considered one of the leading figures in the Latin American wars of independence.

Failed Dream of a Unified Latin America

At the end of the wars of independence (1808–1825), many new sovereign states emerged in the Americas from the former Spanish colonies. Throughout this revolutionary era, Bolívar envisioned various unions that would ensure the independence of Spanish America vis-à-vis the European powers—in particular Britain—and the expanding United States. Already in his 1815 Cartagena Manifesto, Bolívar advocated that the Spanish American provinces should present a united front to the Spanish in order to prevent being re-conquered piecemeal, though he did not yet propose a political union of any kind. During the wars of independence, the fight against Spain was marked by an incipient sense of nationalism. It was unclear what the new states that replaced the Spanish Monarchy should be. Most of those who fought for independence identified with both their birth provinces and Spanish America as a whole, both of which they referred to as their patria, a term roughly translated as “fatherland” and “homeland.”

For Bolivar, Hispanic America was the fatherland. He dreamed of a united Spanish America and in the pursuit of that purpose not only created Gran Colombia but also the Confederation of the Andes, which was to gather the latter together with Peru and Bolivia. Moreover, he envisaged and promoted a network of treaties that would hold together the newly liberated Hispanic American countries. Nonetheless, he was unable to control the centrifugal process that pushed in all directions. On January 20, 1830, as his dream fell apart, Bolívar delivered his last address to the nation, announcing that he would be stepping down from the presidency of Gran Colombia. In his speech, a distraught Bolívar urged the people to maintain the union and to be wary of the intentions of those who advocated for separation. At the time, “Colombians” referred to the people of Gran Colombia (Venezuela, New Granada, and Ecuador), not modern-day Colombia:

Colombians! Today I cease to govern you. I have served you for twenty years as soldier and leader. During this long period we have taken back our country, liberated three republics, fomented many civil wars, and four times I have returned to the people their omnipotence, convening personally four constitutional congresses. These services were inspired by your virtues, your courage, and your patriotism; mine is the great privilege of having governed you…

Colombians! Gather around the constitutional congress. It represents the wisdom of the nation, the legitimate hope of the people, and the final point of reunion of the patriots. Its sovereign decrees will determine our lives, the happiness of the Republic, and the glory of Colombia. If dire circumstances should cause you to abandon it, there will be no health for the country, and you will drown in the ocean of anarchy, leaving as your children’s legacy nothing but crime, blood, and death.

Fellow Countrymen! Hear my final plea as I end my political career; in the name of Colombia I ask you, beg you, to remain united, lest you become the assassins of the country and your own executioners.

Bolívar ultimately failed in his attempt to prevent the collapse of the union. Gran Colombia was dissolved later that year and replaced by the republics of Venezuela, New Granada, and Ecuador. Ironically, these countries were established as centralist nations and would be governed for decades this way by leaders who, during Bolívar’s last years, accused him of betraying republican principles and wanting to establish a permanent dictatorship. These separatists, among them José Antonio Páez and Francisco de Paula Santander, justified their opposition to Bolívar for this reason and publicly denounced him as a monarch.

For the rest of the 19th century and into the early 20th century, the political environment of Latin America was fraught with civil wars and characterized by a sociopolitical phenomenon known as caudillismo . This was characterized by the arrival of an authoritarian but charismatic political figure who would typically rise to power in an unconventional way, often legitimizing his right to govern through undemocratic processes. These caudillos would maintain their control primarily on the basis of a cult of personality, populist politics, and military might. On his deathbed, Bolívar envisaged the emergence of countless “ caudillos ” competing for the pieces of the great nation he once dreamed about.

Gran Colombia

Gran Colombia, a state that encompassed much of northern South America and part of southern Central America, was created in 1819 by Simón Bolívar as part of his vision for a unified Latin America, but was fraught with political instability and collapsed in 1831.

Identify Gran Colombia and the modern states it later became

• As the wars of independence in Latin America were being fought, Simón Bolívar developed a vision for a unified Latin America to protect the new independence from European interests.
• Out of this vision, Gran Colombia was formed in 1819 following Bolívar’s victory against the Spanish at the Battle of Carabobo; he was elected the president.
• In its first years, Gran Colombia helped other provinces still at war with Spain become independent, adding more territories to its federation; by 1824 it had 12 administrative departments.
• The history of Gran Colombia was marked by a struggle between those who supported a centralized government with a strong presidency and those who supported a decentralized, federal form of government.
• After years of struggle between the centralists and federalists, in 1828 delegates met to create a new constitution which Bolívar proposed to base on Bolivia’s, but it was unpopular and the constitutional convention fell apart.
• In two years, Bolívar resigned as president and within a year, Gran Colombia dissolved, forming the independent states of Venezuela, Ecuador, and New Granada.
• Gran Colombia included the territories of present-day Colombia, Venezuela, Ecuador, Panama, northern Peru, western Guyana, and northwest Brazil.
• New Granada : The name given on May 27, 1717, to the jurisdiction of the Spanish Empire in northern South America, corresponding to modern Colombia, Ecuador, Panama, and Venezuela.
• federation : A political entity characterized by a union of partially self-governing states or regions under a central government. Typically, the self-governing status of the component states, as well as the division of power between them and the central government, is constitutionally entrenched and may not be altered by a unilateral decision of either party.
• Battle of Carabobo : A battle fought between independence fighters led by Venezuelan General Simón Bolívar and the Royalist forces led by Spanish Field Marshal Miguel de la Torre. Bolívar’s decisive victory at Carabobo led to the independence of Venezuela and establishment of the Republic of Gran Colombia.

Gran Colombia is a name used today for the state that encompassed much of northern South America and part of southern Central America from 1819 to 1831. It included the territories of present-day Colombia, Venezuela, Ecuador, Panama, northern Peru, western Guyana, and northwest Brazil.

The first three were the successor states to Gran Colombia at its dissolution. Panama was separated from Colombia in 1903. Since Gran Colombia’s territory corresponded more or less to the original jurisdiction of the former Viceroyalty of New Granada, it also claimed the Caribbean coast of Nicaragua, the Mosquito Coast.

Its existence was marked by a struggle between those who supported a centralized government with a strong presidency and those who supported a decentralized, federal form of government.

At the same time, another political division emerged between those who supported the Constitution of Cúcuta and two groups who sought to do away with the Constitution, either in favor of breaking up the nation into smaller republics or maintaining the union but creating an even stronger presidency. The faction that favored constitutional rule coalesced around Vice-President Francisco de Paula Santander, while those who supported the creation of a stronger presidency were led by President Simón Bolívar. The two men had been allies in the war against Spanish rule, but by 1825, their differences became public and contributed to the political instability from that year onward. Gran Columbia broke apart in 1831.

History of Gran Colombia

As Bolívar made advances against the royalist forces during the Venezuelan war of independence, he began to propose the creation of various large states and confederations, inspired by Francisco de Miranda’s idea of an independent state consisting of all of Spanish America, called “Colombia,” the “American Empire,” or the “American Federation.” The aim was to ensure the independence of Spanish America and protect the area’s newly won autonomy. In 1819 Bolívar was able to successfully create a nation called “Colombia” (today referred to as Gran Colombia) out of several Spanish American provinces.

Since the new nation was quickly proclaimed after Bolívar’s unexpected victory in New Granada, its government was temporarily set up as a federal republic, made up of three departments headed by a vice-president and with capitals in the cities of cities of Bogotá (Cundinamarca Department), Caracas (Venezuela Department), and Quito (Quito Department).

The Constitution of Cúcuta was drafted in 1821 at the Congress of Cúcuta, establishing the republic’s capital in Bogotá. Bolívar and Santander were elected as the nation’s president and vice-president. A great degree of centralization was established by the assembly at Cúcuta, since several New Granadan and Venezuelan deputies of the Congress who were formerly ardent federalists now came to believe that centralism was necessary to successfully manage the war against the royalists. The departments created in 1819 were split into 12 smaller departments, each governed by an intendant appointed by the central government. Since not all of the provinces were represented at Cúcuta because many areas of the nation remained in royalist hands, the congress called for a new constitutional convention to meet in ten years.

In its first years, Gran Colombia helped other provinces still at war with Spain to become independent: all of Venezuela except Puerto Cabello was liberated at the Battle of Carabobo, Panama joined the federation in November 1821, and the provinces of Pasto, Guayaquil, and Quito in 1822. The Gran Colombian army later consolidated the independence of Peru in 1824. Bolívar and Santander were re-elected in 1826.

As the war against Spain came to an end in the mid-1820s, federalist and regionalist sentiments that were suppressed for the sake of the war arose once again. There were calls for a modification of the political division, and related economic and commercial disputes between regions reappeared. Ecuador had important economic and political grievances. Since the end of the 18th century, its textile industry suffered because cheaper textiles were being imported. After independence, Gran Colombia adopted a low-tariff policy, which benefited agricultural regions such as Venezuela. Moreover, from 1820 to 1825, the area was ruled directly by Bolívar because of the extraordinary powers granted to him. His top priority was the war in Peru against the royalists, not solving Ecuador’s economic problems.

The strongest calls for a federal arrangement came from Venezuela, where there was strong federalist sentiment among the region’s liberals, many of whom had not fought in the war of independence but supported Spanish liberalism in the previous decade and now allied themselves with the conservative Commandant General of the Department of Venezuela, José Antonio Páez, against the central government.

In 1826, Venezuela came close to seceding from Gran Colombia. That year, Congress began impeachment proceedings against Páez, who resigned his post on April 28 but reassumed it two days later in defiance of the central government.

In November, two assemblies met in Venezuela to discuss the future of the region, but no formal independence was declared at either. That same month, skirmishes broke out between the supporters of Páez and Bolívar in the east and south of Venezuela. By the end of the year, Bolívar was in Maracaibo preparing to march into Venezuela with an army, if necessary. Ultimately, political compromises prevented this. In January, Bolívar offered the rebellious Venezuelans a general amnesty and the promise to convene a new constitutional assembly before the ten-year period established by the Constitution of Cúcuta, and Páez backed down and recognized Bolívar’s authority. The reforms, however, never fully satisfied the different political factions in Gran Colombia, and no permanent consolidation was achieved. The instability of the state’s structure was now apparent to all.

In 1828, the new constitutional assembly, the Convention of Ocaña, began its sessions. At its opening, Bolívar again proposed a new constitution based on the Bolivian one, but this suggestion continued to be unpopular. The convention fell apart when pro-Bolívar delegates walked out rather than sign a federalist constitution. After this failure, Bolívar believed that by centralizing his constitutional powers he could prevent the separatists from bringing down the union. He ultimately failed to do so. As the collapse of the nation became evident in 1830, Bolívar resigned from the presidency. Internal political strife between the different regions intensified even as General Rafael Urdaneta temporarily took power in Bogotá, attempting to use his authority to ostensibly restore order but actually hoping to convince Bolívar to return to the presidency and the nation to accept him. The federation finally dissolved in the closing months of 1830 and was formally abolished in 1831. Venezuela, Ecuador, and New Granada came to exist as independent states.

Gran Colombia: A map of Gran Colombia showing the 12 departments created in 1824 and territories disputed with neighboring countries.

José de San Martín

José de San Martín was one of the prime leaders of Latin America’s successful struggle for freedom from the Spanish Empire, commanding crucial military campaigns that led to independence for Argentina, Chile, and Peru.

Compare José de San Martín’s efforts to Bolívar’s

• José de San Martín, along with Simón Bolívar, was one of the most important leaders of the Latin American independence movements.
• His military leadership was crucial in the wars of independence in Argentina, Chile, and Peru.
• Born in what became Argentina, San Martín mostly grew up in Spain, taking part in the Peninsular War against Napoleon.
• He left Spain and joined the Argentine War of Independence in 1811, a choice debated by historians.
• He provided a much-needed boost to the revolution, mustering the Army of the Andes, whose crossing of the Andes was instrumental in freeing Argentina and Chile from Spanish rule.
• From there he went to Peru, where he fought for several years in collaboration and conflict with Simón Bolívar. He left suddenly in 1822 for France, leaving the remainder of the war for independence to be led by Bolívar, who succeeded against the Spanish forces in 1824.
• Army of the Andes : A military force created by the United Provinces of the Río de la Plata (Argentina) and mustered by general José de San Martín in his campaign to free Chile from the Spanish Empire. In 1817, it crossed the Andes Mountains from the Argentine province of Cuyo (at the current-day province of Mendoza, Argentina), and succeeded in dislodging the Spanish from the country.
• Crossing of the Andes : One of the most important feats in the Argentine and Chilean wars of independence, in which a combined army of Argentine soldiers and Chilean exiles invaded Chile, leading to Chile’s liberation from Spanish rule. The crossing of the Andes was a major step in the strategy devised by José de San Martín to defeat the royalist forces at their stronghold of Lima, Viceroyalty of Perú, and secure the Spanish American independence movements.

José de San Martín was an Argentine general and the prime leader of the southern part of South America’s successful struggle for independence from the Spanish Empire. Born in Yapeyú, Corrientes, in modern-day Argentina, he left his mother country at the early age of seven to study in Málaga, Spain.

In 1808, after taking part in the Peninsular War against Napoleon’s France, San Martín contacted South American supporters of independence from Spain. In 1812, he set sail for Buenos Aires and offered his services to the United Provinces of the Río de la Plata, present-day Argentina. After the Battle of San Lorenzo and time commanding the Army of the North during 1814, he organized a plan to defeat the Spanish forces that menaced the United Provinces from the north, using an alternative path to the Viceroyalty of Peru. This objective first involved the establishment of a new army, the Army of the Andes, in Cuyo Province, Argentina. From there, he led the Crossing of the Andes to Chile and triumphed at the Battle of Chacabuco and the Battle of Maipú (1818), thus liberating Chile from royalist rule. Then he sailed to attack the Spanish stronghold of Lima, Peru.

On July 12, 1821, after seizing partial control of Lima, San Martín was appointed Protector of Peru, and Peruvian independence was officially declared on July 28. On July 22, after a closed-door meeting with fellow libertador Simón Bolívar at Guayaquil, Ecuador, Bolívar took over the task of fully liberating Peru. San Martín unexpectedly left the country and resigned the command of his army, excluding himself from politics and the military, and moved to France in 1824. The details of the July 22 meeting would be a subject of debate by later historians.

San Martín is regarded as a national hero of Argentina and Peru, and together with Bolívar, one of the Liberators of Spanish South America. The Order of the Liberator General San Martín (Orden del Libertador General San Martín), created in his honor, is the highest decoration conferred by the Argentine government.

Wars of Independence: Argentina, Chile, Peru

San Martín entered the Argentine War of Independence about a year after it started. The reasons that he left Spain in 1811 to join the Spanish American wars of independence as a patriot remain contentious among historians. The action would seem contradictory and out of character, because if the patriots were waging an independentist and anti-Hispanic war, then he would be a traitor or deserter. There are a variety of explanations by different historians. Some argue that he returned because he missed South America, and the war of independence justified changing sides to support it. Other contend that the wars in the Americas were not initially separatist but between supporters of absolutism and liberalism, which thus maintains a continuity between San Martín’s actions in Spain and in Latin America.

The Argentine War of Independence started with the May Revolution and other military campaigns with mixed success. The undesired outcomes of the Paraguay and Upper Peru campaigns led the Junta (the provisional government after the May Revolution) to be replaced by an executive Triumvirate in September 1811.

A few days after his arrival in Buenos Aires, San Martín was interviewed by the First Triumvirate. They appointed him a lieutenant colonel of cavalry and asked him to create a cavalry unit, as Buenos Aires did not have good cavalry. He began to organize the Regiment of Mounted Grenadiers with Alvear and Zapiola. As Buenos Aires lacked professional military leaders, San Martín was entrusted with the protection of the whole city, but kept focused in the task of building the military unit. A year later the Triumvirate was renewed and San Martín was promoted to colonel.

San Martín came up with a plan: organize an army in Mendoza, cross the Andes to Chile, and move to Peru by sea, all while another general defended the north frontier. This would place him in Peru without crossing the harsh terrain of Upper Peru, where two campaigns had already been defeated. To advance this plan, he requested the governorship of the Cuyo province, which was accepted.

San Martín began immediately to organize the Army of the Andes. He drafted all citizens who could bear arms and all slaves from ages 16 to 30, requested reinforcements to Buenos Aires, and reorganized the economy for war production. San Martín proposed that the country declare independence immediately, before the crossing. That way, they would be acting as a sovereign nation and not as a mere rebellion, but the proposal never was accepted. Needing even more soldiers, San Martín extended the emancipation of slaves to ages 14 to 55, and even allowed them to be promoted to higher military ranks. He proposed a similar measure at the national level, but Pueyrredón encountered severe resistance. He included the Chileans who escaped Chile after the disaster of Rancagua, and organized them in four units: infantry, cavalry, artillery, and dragoons. At the end of 1816, the Army of the Andes had 5,000 men, 10,000 mules, and 1,500 horses. San Martin organized military intelligence, propaganda, and disinformation to confuse the royalist armies (such as the specific routes taken in the Andes), boost the national fervor of his army, and promote desertion among the royalists.

In early 1817, San Martín led the Crossing of the Andes into Chile, obtaining a decisive victory at the battle of Chacabuco on February 17, which allowed the exiled Chilean leader Bernardo O’Higgins to enter Santiago de Chile unopposed and install a new independent government. In December 1817, a popular referendum was set up to decide about the Independence of Chile. On February 18, 1818, the first anniversary of the battle of Chacabuco, Chile declared its independence from the Spanish Crown.

From there, San Martín took the Army of the Andes to fight in Peru. To begin the liberation of Peru, Argentina and Chile signed a treaty on February 5, 1819, to prepare for the invasion. General José de San Martín believed that the liberation of Argentina wouldn’t be secure until the royalist stronghold in Peru was defeated. Peru had armed forces nearly four times the strength of those of San Martín. With this disparity, San Martín tried to avoid battles. He tried instead to divide the enemy forces in several locations, as during the Crossing of the Andes, and trap the royalists with a pincer movement with either reinforcements of the Army of the North from the South or the army of Simón Bolívar from the North. He also tried to promote rebellions and insurrection within the royalist ranks, and promised the emancipation of any slaves that deserted their Peruvian masters and joined the army of San Martín. When he reached Lima, San Martín invited all of the populace of Lima to swear oath to the Independence cause. The signing of the Act of Independence of Peru was held on July 15, 1821. San Martín became the leader of the government, even though he did not want to lead. He was appointed Protector of Peru. After several years of fighting, San Martín abandoned Peru in September 1822 and left the whole command of the Independence movement to Simon Bolivar. The Peruvian War culminated in 1824 with the defeat of the Spanish Empire in the battles of Junin and Ayacucho.

Guayaquil Conference

The Guayaquil Conference was a meeting that took place on July 26, 1822, in Guayaquil, Ecuador, between José de San Martín and Simón Bolívar, to discuss the future of Perú (and South America in general). San Martín arrived in Guayaquil on July 25, where he was enthusiastically greeted by Bolívar. However, the two men could not come to an agreement, despite their common goals and mutual respect, even when San Martín offered to serve under Bolívar. Both men had very different ideas about how to organize the governments of the countries that they had liberated. Bolívar was in favor of forming a series of republics in the newly independent nations, whereas San Martín preferred the European system of rule and wanted to put monarchies in place. San Martín was also in favor of placing a European prince in power as King of Peru when it was liberated. The conference, consequently, was a failure, at least for San Martín.

San Martín, after meeting with Bolívar for several hours on July 26, stayed for a banquet and ball given in his honor. Bolívar proposed a toast to “the two greatest men in South America: the general San Martín and myself,” whereas San Martín drank to “the prompt conclusion of the war, the organization of the different Republics of the continent and the health of the Liberator of Colombia.” After the conference, San Martín abdicated his powers in Peru and returned to Argentina. Soon afterward, he left South America entirely and retired in France.

Guayaquil Conference: The conference between Simón Bolívar and José de San Martín. The real conference took place inside an office, and not in the countryside as the portrait suggests.

• Decolonization of the Americas. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decolonization_of_the_Americas . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• Latin American wars of independence. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_American_wars_of_independence . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• Haitian Revolution. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haitian_Revolution . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• Decolonization. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decolonization . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• 600px-San_Domingo.jpg. Provided by : Wikimedia Commons. Located at : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:San_Domingo.jpg . License : Public Domain: No Known Copyright
• Simu00f3n Bolu00edvar. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Bolivar . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• Latin American integration. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_American_integration . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• Military career of Simu00f3n Bolu00edvar. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_career_of_Simon_Bolivar . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• Bolivar_Arturo_Michelena.jpg. Provided by : Wikimedia Commons. Located at : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bolivar_Arturo_Michelena.jpg . License : Public Domain: No Known Copyright
• Gran Colombia. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gran_Colombia . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• Gran_Colombia_map_1824.jpg. Provided by : Wikimedia Commons. Located at : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gran_Colombia_map_1824.jpg . License : Public Domain: No Known Copyright
• Josu00e9 de San Martu00edn. Provided by : Wikpedia. Located at : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jose_de_San_Martin . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• Argentine War of Independence. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentine_War_of_Independence . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• Military career of Josu00e9 de San Martu00edn in Spain. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_career_of_Jose_de_San_Maritn_in_Spain . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• Guayaquil Conference. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guayaquil_Conference . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• Entrevista_de_Guayaquil.jpg. Provided by : Wikimedia Commons. Located at : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Entrevista_de_Guayaquil.jpg . License : Public Domain: No Known Copyright

Privacy Policy

If you're seeing this message, it means we're having trouble loading external resources on our website.

If you're behind a web filter, please make sure that the domains *.kastatic.org and *.kasandbox.org are unblocked.

To log in and use all the features of Khan Academy, please enable JavaScript in your browser.

World History Project - 1750 to the Present

Course: world history project - 1750 to the present   >   unit 2.

• READ: The Atlantic Revolutions
• READ: West Africa in the Age of Revolutions
• BEFORE YOU WATCH: The Haitian Revolution
• WATCH: The Haitian Revolution
• READ: Manuela Sáenz, Jonotas, and Natan (Graphic Biography)
• BEFORE YOU WATCH: Colonization and Resistance - Through a Pueblo Lens
• WATCH: Colonization and Resistance: Through a Pueblo Lens | World History Project
• BEFORE YOU WATCH: Tea, Taxes, and the American Revolution
• WATCH: Tea, Taxes, and The American Revolution
• BEFORE YOU WATCH: The French Revolution
• WATCH: The French Revolution
• BEFORE YOU WATCH: Latin American Revolutions

WATCH: Latin American Revolutions

• Revolutions Around the World

Want to join the conversation?

• Upvote Button navigates to signup page
• Downvote Button navigates to signup page
• Flag Button navigates to signup page

Video transcript

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• Introduction
• The indigenous world and the word “Indian”
• Sedentary peoples
• Semisedentary peoples
• Nonsedentary peoples
• Ethnic diversity and its results
• The overseas tradition
• Indians and Spaniards
• A new Spanish subculture
• Conquest of Mexico
• Conquest of Peru
• The central-area encomienda
• Spanish women
• Indians among Spaniards
• Institutional, legal, and intellectual developments
• Trunk lines
• Postconquest indigenous society
• The central areas in the mature period
• The Spanish fringe
• The early period
• The sugar age
• Economy and society
• The Caribbean islands
• The Bourbon reforms
• Brazil after 1700
• Preindependence phenomena
• The independence of Latin America
• The southern movement in South America
• The north and the culmination of independence
• Mexico and Central America

Constitutions

• Disorder and caudillismo
• Economic obstacles
• Mobility and hierarchy
• Social institutions
• Political and economic transitions, 1850–70
• Export economies
• Capitalism and social transitions
• Oligarchies in power
• World war and world trade
• The emerging force of nationalism
• Population and social change
• The Mexican Revolution
• Broadening of political participation
• Expanding role of the state
• Socialism, communism, fascism
• Good Neighbor Policy and World War II
• Economic agenda and patterns of growth
• Developments in social policy
• The United States and Latin America in the Cold War era
• Impact of the Cuban Revolution
• Movement toward democracy
• The advent of populism
• Christian Democracy
• Bureaucratic authoritarianism
• Debt crisis
• Return to democracy
• A shift to neoliberalism
• Religious trends
• A changing society

• Who was Simón Bolívar?
• What was Simón Bolívar’s early life like?
• What role did Simón Bolívar play in the Latin American independence movement?
• Why was Simón Bolívar called “The Liberator?”
• How did Simón Bolívar die?

Building new nations, 1826–50

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• PBS - Black in Latin America - Black in Latin America's Henry Louis Gates
• Latin America - Children's Encyclopedia (Ages 8-11)
• Latin America - Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)
• Table Of Contents

While Brazil maintained its territorial integrity after independence, the former Spanish America split into more than a dozen separate countries, following the administrative divisions of the colonial system. The difficulty for the inhabitants of these units was not, however, as simple as the demarcation of geographic boundaries. Rather, the recently emancipated countries of Latin America faced the much more daunting challenge of defining and consolidating new nations. With the structures of the old system removed, the inhabitants of each country set out on programs to create a postcolonial political, economic, and social order. The obstacles confronting them were myriad and imposing. As Bolívar himself exclaimed in a final cry of despair, “America is ungovernable for us…; he who serves a revolution ploughs the sea.” Indeed, it was only toward 1850, at the end of a 25-year period sometimes known as “the long wait,” that the outlines of that new order began to take their definitive form across the region .

Political models and the search for authority

Recent news.

One of the most pressing and also most enduring problems that leaders of Latin American nations faced in the decades after independence was establishing the legitimacy of their new governments . In this regard the break with the colonial system proved traumatic. In Iberian political traditions, power and authority resided to a great extent in the figure of the monarch . Only the monarch had the ability to dominate the church, the military, and other powerful corporate groups in Iberian and colonial Latin American societies. Representative government and the concept of popular sovereignty , as a corollary , had a weak presence in Iberian political culture . With the Spanish king removed—and with him the ultimate source of political legitimacy—Creole elites had to find new foundations on which to construct systems of governance that their compatriots would accept and respect.

Although in practice they were unable to abandon the legacies of three centuries of Iberian colonial rule, leaders in Latin America turned generally to other political traditions for solutions to the problem of legitimacy. Adapting models from northern Europe and the United States , they set up republics across the region. Doing so not only helped justify their separation from Spain but also enabled Latin American elites to try to follow the example of countries they most admired, particularly Great Britain, the United States, and France . Many in the upper classes of Latin American societies identified political institutions as sources of the economic progress those countries were enjoying. At the same time, efforts to implement those political systems in Latin America brought to the region’s new countries Enlightenment conceptions of politics based on rationality and a vision of politics as an interaction of individuals who enjoyed specific, definable rights and duties.

Particularly in the first, heady years of independence, elites throughout Latin America exhibited the influence of the Enlightenment in their propensity for producing constitutions. Those documents demonstrated not only attempts to impose rational plans on new nations but also the changing attitudes of elites toward their societies.

The earliest constitutions appeared in Venezuela , Chile , and New Granada in the years 1811–12. The authors of those founding documents rather optimistically intended to create representative government in independent Latin America and to declare inalienable natural rights of liberty, security, property, and equality. To implement those ideas, these constitutions set up a division of power in which the executive was comparatively weak.

From the mid-1810s to mid-century the overwhelming tendency was to move away from those early schemes. With different regions and elite factions battling against each other, the first liberal constitutional governments had failed. Now leaders in the region sought to erect stronger and more highly centralized states, again carefully laying out their programs in constitutions. This shift was not a rejection of foreign models. On the contrary, this change followed the evolution of European political thought; Latin American elites were now basing their ideas on different foreign theories, turning away from those of Jean-Jacques Rousseau and toward those of more conservative thinkers like Montesquieu and Jeremy Bentham . At the same time, the movement toward stronger executives and more centralized states reflected specific circumstances of these emerging new nations. At first, elites wanted a more powerful state to complete the victory over Spain and then to gain recognition from a Europe by this time dominated by antirepublican attitudes. As political order proved difficult to achieve, many Latin American leaders also looked to a more centralized state as an instrument against political and civil unrest.

Hopes for a new and stronger government only rarely centred on the idea of monarchy. Leaders in Argentina and Chile discussed the possibility of introducing a constitutional monarchy with a European king at its head. Mexico had emperors, first with Iturbide and then in 1864–67 with the Austrian emperor Francis Joseph’s brother Maximilian, and Brazil enjoyed relative stability in a constitutional monarchy that lasted from independence until 1889. Still, such initiatives were temporary and exceptional. Latin Americans encountered a great deal of difficulty in finding suitable European princes to rule their countries. Local figures, furthermore, lacked the necessary authority to be accepted as monarchs. Thus, for practical as well as ideological reasons, republics were the rule during the 19th century. As leaders sought greater centralization, they adopted new forms of republicanism. Some, particularly military leaders such as Bolívar and the generals who had served under him, followed the model of a Napoleonic state. Bolívar’s recommendation of a powerful president-for-life and a hereditary or life senate, resembling the structures of constitutional monarchy with republican ornamentation, was never followed. The predominant model was that of the regime that Spanish liberals had set up in 1812. Not all new constitutions after 1815 jettisoned federalism; Mexico in 1824, for instance, embraced that ideal. Overall, Latin America moved toward stronger, more-centralized republican governments by the mid-19th century.

Causes of the Latin American Revolution

• History Before Columbus
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Caribbean History
• Central American History
• South American History
• Mexican History
• American History
• African American History
• African History
• Ancient History and Culture
• Asian History
• European History
• Medieval & Renaissance History
• Military History
• The 20th Century
• Women's History
• Ph.D., Spanish, Ohio State University
• M.A., Spanish, University of Montana
• B.A., Spanish, Penn State University

As late as 1808, Spain's New World Empire stretched from parts of the present-day western U.S. to Tierra del Fuego in South America, from the Caribbean Sea to the Pacific Ocean. By 1825, it was all gone, except for a handful of islands in the Caribbean—broken into several independent states. How could Spain's New World Empire fall apart so quickly and completely? The answer is long and complicated, but here are some of the essential causes of the Latin American Revolution.

Lack of Respect for the Creoles

By the late eighteenth century, the Spanish colonies had a thriving class of Creoles (Criollo in Spanish), wealthy men and women of European ancestry born in the New World. The revolutionary hero Simon Bolivar is a good example, as he was born in Caracas to a well-to-do Creole family that had lived in Venezuela for four generations, but as a rule, did not intermarry with the locals.

Spain discriminated against the Creoles, appointing mostly new Spanish immigrants to important positions in the colonial administration. In the audiencia (court) of Caracas, for example, no native Venezuelans were appointed from 1786 to 1810. During that time, ten Spaniards and four Creoles from other areas did serve. This irritated the influential Creoles who correctly felt that they were being ignored.

No Free Trade

The vast Spanish New World Empire produced many goods, including coffee, cacao, textiles, wine, minerals, and more. But the colonies were only allowed to trade with Spain, and at rates advantageous for Spanish merchants. Many Latin Americans began selling their goods illegally to the British colonies and, after 1783, U.S. merchants. By the late 18th century, Spain was forced to loosen some trade restrictions, but the move was too little, too late, as those who produced these goods now demanded a fair price for them.

Other Revolutions

By 1810, Spanish America could look to other nations to see revolutions and their results. Some were a positive influence: The American Revolution (1765–1783) was seen by many in South America as a good example of elite leaders of colonies throwing off European rule and replacing it with a more fair and democratic society—later, some constitutions of new republics borrowed heavily from the U.S. Constitution. Other revolutions were not as positive. The Haitian Revolution, a bloody but successful uprising of enslaved people against their French colonial enslavers (1791–1804), terrified landowners in the Caribbean and northern South America, and as the situation worsened in Spain, many feared that Spain could not protect them from a similar uprising.

A Weakened Spain

In 1788, Charles III of Spain, a competent ruler, died, and his son Charles IV took over. Charles IV was weak and indecisive and mostly occupied himself with hunting, allowing his ministers to run the Empire. As an ally of Napoleon's First French Empire, Spain willingly joined with Napoleonic France and began fighting the British. With a weak ruler and the Spanish military tied up, Spain's presence in the New World decreased markedly and the Creoles felt more ignored than ever.

After Spanish and French naval forces were crushed at the Battle of Trafalgar in 1805, Spain's ability to control the colonies lessened even more. When Great Britain attacked Buenos Aires in 1806–1807, Spain could not defend the city and a local militia had to suffice.

American Identities

There was a growing sense in the colonies of being separate from Spain. These differences were cultural and often a source of great pride among Creole families and regions. By the end of the eighteenth century, the visiting Prussian scientist Alexander Von Humboldt (1769–1859) noted that the locals preferred to be called Americans rather than Spaniards. Meanwhile, Spanish officials and newcomers consistently treated Creoles with disdain, maintaining and further widening the social gap between them.

While Spain was racially "pure" in the sense that the Moors, Jews, Romani people, and other ethnic groups had been kicked out centuries before, the New World populations were a diverse mixture of Europeans, Indigenous people (some of whom were enslaved), and enslaved Black people. The highly racist colonial society was extremely sensitive to minute percentages of Black or Indigenous blood. A person's status in society could be determined by how many 64ths of Spanish heritage one had.

To further muddle things up, Spanish law allowed wealthy people of mixed heritage to "buy" whiteness and thus rise in a society that did not want to see their status change. This caused resentment within the privileged classes. The "dark side" of the revolutions was that they were fought, in part, to maintain a racist status quo in the colonies freed of Spanish liberalism.

Final Straw: Napoleon Invades Spain 1808

Tired of the waffling of Charles IV and Spain's inconsistency as an ally, Napoleon invaded in 1808 and quickly conquered not only Spain but Portugal as well. He replaced Charles IV with his own brother,  Joseph Bonaparte . A Spain ruled by France was an outrage even for New World loyalists. Many men and women who would have otherwise supported the royalist side now joined the insurgents. Those who resisted Napoleon in Spain begged the colonials for help but refused to promise to reduce trade restrictions if they won.

The chaos in Spain provided a perfect excuse to rebel without committing treason. Many Creoles said they were loyal to Spain, not Napoleon. In places like Argentina, colonies "sort of" declared independence, claiming they would only rule themselves until such time as Charles IV or his son Ferdinand was put back on the Spanish throne. This half-measure was much more palatable to those who did not want to declare independence outright. But in the end, there was no real going back from such a step. Argentina was the first to formally declare independence on July 9, 1816.

The independence of Latin America from Spain was a foregone conclusion as soon as the creoles began thinking of themselves as Americans and the Spaniards as something different from them. By that time, Spain was between a rock and a hard place: The creoles clamored for positions of influence in the colonial bureaucracy and for freer trade. Spain granted neither, which caused great resentment and helped lead to independence. Even if Spain had agreed to these changes, they would have created a more powerful, wealthy colonial elite with experience in administering their home regions—a road that also would have led directly to independence. Some Spanish officials must have realized this and so the decision was taken to squeeze the utmost out of the colonial system before it collapsed.

Of all of the factors listed above, the most important is probably  Napoleon 's invasion of Spain. Not only did it provide a massive distraction and tie up Spanish troops and ships, it pushed many undecided Creoles over the edge in favor of independence. By the time Spain was beginning to stabilize—Ferdinand reclaimed the throne in 1813—colonies in Mexico, Argentina, and northern South America were in revolt.

• Lockhart, James, and Stuart B. Schwartz. "Early Latin America: A History of Colonial Spanish America and Brazil." Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983.
• Lynch, John.  Simón Bolívar: A Life.  2006: Yale University Press.
• Scheina, Robert L. " Latin America's Wars: The Age of the Caudillo, 1791–1899."  Washington: Brassey's, 2003.
• Selbin, Eric. "Modern Latin American Revolutions," 2nd ed. New York: Routledge, 2018. 
• Civil Wars and Revolutions in Latin American History
• The 10 Most Important Events in the History of Latin America
• Mestizaje in Latin America: Definition and History
• 10 Facts About Simon Bolivar
• How Latin America Gained Independence from Spain
• Biography of Francisco de Miranda, Venezuelan Leader
• Venezuela’s Declaration of Independence in 1810
• The 10 Most Influential Latin Americans in History
• How Did Porfirio Diaz Stay in Power for 35 Years?
• Wars in Latin, South American History
• The Haitian Revolution: Successful Revolt by an Enslaved People
• Independence Days in Latin America
• Biography of Pascual Orozco, Early Leader of the Mexican Revolution
• Buena Vista Social Club: Cuban Music Recaptures the World's Attention
• The Nicaraguan Revolution: History and Impact
• Biography of Eloy Alfaro

Latin American Revolutions Research Project: Home

• Books and Databases

Assignment Documents

Here are your assignment handouts:

• Latin American Revolutions Research Project
• Latin American Revolutions Case Analysis

Constructing Your Narrative

Your group’s narrative must include the following information….

Inspiration

• Who were the leaders of the revolution?
• What conditions in the colonies led people to demand revolution?
• What ideas inspired revolutionary leaders in your case study?
• How did those revolutionary leaders inspire their followers?
• How did individuals assert their desired independence? (writing, speeches, protests, violence?)
• Between what groups did conflict arise?
• What conflict existed among the revolutionaries?
• How was that conflict expressed? (violence, politics, etc.?)
• How was the conflict resolved?
• Did the revolutionaries attain their initial goal of going from subject to citizen?
• Once independence was gained, what system of government did the new countries establish?
• Who held power?
• Who became marginalized?
• Next: Books and Databases >>
• Last Updated: Mar 31, 2023 10:48 AM
• URL: https://libguides.wellesleyps.org/hs/latinamericanrevs

• About WordPress
• Get Involved
• WordPress.org
• Documentation
• Learn WordPress

Latin American Revolutions

Assignments

I make extensive use of the Moodle Gradebook : this gives you the ability to check your course standing at any time.  I’m happy to discuss your grade with you during my office hours.  Please just take the time to calculate your current standing using the grade allocation outlined below first.  While the individual grades and comments in the Moodle Gradebook reflect my evaluation of your course performance to date, you cannot rely on Moodle’s calculation of your course average.

Grade Components:

Professionalism & participation (10%):, participation.

Your active participation in class activities and discussion are crucial to the success of the course.  You are expected to come to class fully prepared to discuss the day’s texts; this includes bringing copies of your reading assignments so that you can support your ideas with specific examples, your completed historical analysis worksheets, and your notes and questions on the material.  You will be graded on the quality of your contributions to our class discussions.  Simply attending class without any further involvement in our discussions will result in a participation grade of “C” or “Satisfactory.”

You will be given the chance to evaluate your participation and make a case for what participation grade you deserve several times during the semester.  This is a chance for you to reflect on your involvement in the class, and to let me know how you feel you are doing.  I take your personal assessment very seriously.  Self Evaluation of Participation

Classroom exercises will include debates, primary source analysis, peer review, and short creative non-fiction. You will take a Map Quiz at the beginning of class on Monday, September 2 .   You must pass this map quiz (score of 75% or higher) to pass the class.  Anyone needing to take the quiz more than once may make arrangements to do so during my office hours.

Wikipedia Exercises

A few times during the semester you’ll write short blog posts about your developing Wikipedia research project.  In addition, you’ll be graded on keeping up with the Wikipedia training and research assignments.

Two Formal Blog Posts (6% Total)

Class notes blog post.

Class notes blog posts serve as a place for you all to synthesize the work of our intellectual community. You are all authors building a common understanding of our class work.

Latin America in the News Blog Post

Thoughtful analysis of a recent (past month) article about Latin American history or culture, which places the topic in historical perspective.  You’ll also do an informal, 3-4 minute presentation about your post.

Historical Analysis Prep (15%)

Studies suggest that interteaching – in our case, student completion of short, targeted historical analysis assignments before seminar, coupled with shorter, student-tailored lectures – can help students focus their attention and better prepare for class discussions.  They give me a sense of what you do and don’t understand from the day’s reading.  In addition, they let us devote more time in class to active learning.  As you read each day’s materials, please complete the corresponding Historical Analysis Prep.  These will form the basis of our active discussions.  I’ll randomly check one third of the class’ work every session, grading for completion and good effort.  On other days, I’ll collect all the sheets to give more detailed feedback on your work.

Primary Source Essay: Revolutionary Mexico (10%)

This short paper (750-1000 words) will allow you to hone your skills as a historian analyzing a revolutionary leader’s description of the political and social climate in Mexico.  Upload your pdf to Moodle by 9am on Friday, September 13.

Wikipedia Entry (14%)

For this project, you’ll identify a missing/overlooked topic in the history of Latin American Revolutions on Wikipedia that merits further coverage to expand the depth and breadth of articles on Wikipedia, and counter its systemic biases .  You must pick a topic related to class themes, and that has sufficient resources available to demonstrate your skills of research and writing.  Final project due on Friday, November 27 .

Midterm Exams (25% total; 12.5% Each)

Identifications, primary source analysis, and short answer. Exam #1 will be given in class on Wednesday, October 2 and Exam #2 will be on Friday, November 8 . These are the only times the exam will be administered.

• LA Rev Midterm 1 Review Guide FA19
• LA Rev Midterm 2 Study Guide FA19

Comprehensive Final Exam (20%):

Identifications, very short answer, and two take-home essays.  The final exam will be on Tuesday, December 10 at 9am .  This is the only time the exam will be administered, so please take this into account when making your travel plans.  LA Rev Final Exam Study Guide Fall 2019

Have an account?

Suggestions for you See more

French Revolution

6th -  8th  , the french revolution, 19.7k plays, 7th -  11th  , napoleon bonaparte, 26.1k plays, french revolution and napoleon.

French and Latin American Revolutions

37 questions

Introducing new   Paper mode

No student devices needed.   Know more

Prior to the French Revolution, what was the basis for the division among the Three Estates?

Education Level

Geographic Region

Social Class

Religious Beliefs

Which set of events reflects the proper chronological order of the stages of the French Revolution?

King Louis XVI placed under house arrest, meeting of the Estates General, Reign of Terror

Tennis Court Oath, the Great Fear, Execution of Louis XVI

The Great Fear, March on Versailles, Committee of Public Safety

Tennis Court Oath, Execution of Louis XVI, Storming of the Bastille

During the French Revolution, the Great Fear led to

King Louis XVI being restored to power.

widespread unrest in the country.

Napoleon seizing power in a coup.

negotiations leading to a treaty.

Which aspect of the American Revolution MOST influenced South American independence movements?

British use of Hessian mercenary soldiers

the ability to borrow money to fight a war

Colonial alliances with Native Americans

the ability to overthrow a colonial power

Use the information to answer the question.

• Great Fear

• Storming of the Bastille

• Tennis Court Oath

Which title BEST defines the events in this list?

Enlightenment Influences on the French Revolution

The Moderate Stage of the French Revolution

Major Events during the Reign of Terror

The Steps Leading to the Rise of Napoleon

Which goal did these revolutions have in common?

American Revolution, 1776

• Goal – overthrew British colonial rule

• Outcome– created a republic controlled by the people

French Revolution, 1789

• Goal – overthrew rule by an absolute monarchy

• Outcome– led to dictatorial rule by an emperor

to eliminate monarchical government

to end aristocratic control of commerce

to create a government to protect individual rights

to inspire rebellions in distant territories of the world

A consequence of the radical stage of the French Revolution was the

storming of the Bastille.

meeting of the Estates General.

execution of the King.

taking of the Tennis Court Oath.

Robespierre’s decision to eliminate his political enemies during the radical phase of the French Revolution was enforced by

Estates General

National Assembly

Committee of Public Safety

the Parliament

Prior to the French Revolution, which group was considered part of the Third Estate?

Which event was a defining moment of the Radical Stage of the French Revolution?

The Great Fear

The Storming of the Bastille

The Tennis Court Oath

The Reign of Terror

All of the following were causes of the Moderate Stage of the French Revolution EXCEPT

dissatisfaction in the 3rd Estate.

the burden of the expanding debt.

disillusionment with the King and Queen.

the tyranny of the Committee of Public Safety.

Which of the following correctly completes the graphic?

Reasons for British Imperialism

Growth of Catholicism in Europe

Abolition of the Transatlantic Slave Trade

Factors Leading to the French Revolution

Which event MOST influenced the leaders of the French Revolution?

The Crusades

The Renaissance

The American Revolution

The protestant Reformation

Which figure from the French Revolution led the Committee of Public Safety to carry out the Reign of Terror?

Jean-Paul Marat

Maximilien Robespierre

The revolution in Haiti primarily began as what?

Fight for independence

Slave Revolt

European Attacks

Use the excerpt below to complete the sentence.

1. Men are born and remain free and equal in rights. Social distinctions may be founded only upon the general good.

2. The aim of all political association is the preservation of . . . liberty, property, security, and resistance to oppression.

—Declaration of the Rights of Man, 1789

The provisions in this excerpt are based on the basic principle of

Natural Rights

Checks and balances

Universal suffrage

Class privileges

The creole, mestizo, and peninsulares are some of the groups of people who lived in Spanish colonies. The gentry, indentured servants, and slaves are some of the groups of people who lived in British colonies. These groupings are an example of

Social Classes

Enlightenment Influences

Religious Faiths

Political Parties

Use the graphic to answer the question.

Spanish Colonization of Cuba

Growth of American Imperialism

European Colonization of South America

Latin American Independence Movements

What world event sparked revolutions in Latin America?

The successful overthrow of European governments.

Russia’s emancipation of its serfs

the formal and legal end of European feudalism

the success of the Protestant Reformation

People of mixed African and European descent, who held a low position in colonial Latin American society, were known as what?

Peninsulares

During the European colonization of Latin American, which of the following gave Spanish colonists the power to force natives into servitude or slavery and to pay taxes?

Encomienda System

Treaty of Tordesillas

Line of Demarcation

Who was the leader of the Haitian Revolution?

Jose de San Martin

Simon Bolivar

Toussaint- L'Ouverture

Miguel Hidalgo

What happened to Mexican revolutionary, Christian priest, Father Hidalgo when he led Mexico to its independence?

Mexico easily and quickly won independence.

Father Hidalgo was killed and Jose Morelos took his place in the fight for independence.

Mexico lost its fight.

What of the following is a similarity in the actions of leaders Simon Bolivar and Napoleon Bonaparte?

established a representative form of government

encouraged nationalism

rebelled against imperialism

relied on diplomatic negotiations

What impact did revolutions in France and the United States have on the efforts of Simon Bolivar's revolutionary efforts?

They inspired Simon Bolivar.

They feared further European entanglement

Each leader began to make alliances with European countries

Both leaders tried to negotiate peace

Who led the revolution that established Venezuela as an independent republic?

Jose Morelos

“The rule of law is more powerful than the rule of the tyrant.” — Simón Bolívar

“Whoever has the . . . supreme power . . . is bound to govern by established standing laws.” John Locke

Which of the following explains the similar beliefs of Simon Bolivar and John Locke?

Rulers should govern with unlimited power.

All governments must be democratic.

Rulers must be subject to the law

Governments should be based on the laws of God.

never allow my hands to be idle nor my soul to rest until I have broken the chains laid upon us by Spain.” – Simon Bolivar

How would you characterize this passage made by Simon Bolivar?

He wanted to repair relations with Spain

Spain certainly was happy with Simon Bolivar and his leadership

This leader would fight to the very end in order be free of Spain’s rule

Spain would do anything to free the colonies

Why was the Monroe Doctrine a significant foreign policy achievement during the 1820s?

It brought about a gradual end to the trans-Atlantic slave trade.

It gave the United States control over Spain’s South American colonies.

It ended all diplomatic relations between the United States and Latin America

It established the United States as a major power in the Western Hemisphere.

Use the excerpt to answer the question that follows.

With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European power, we have not interfered, and shall not interfere. But with the Governments who have declared their independence and maintained it, and whose independence we have, on great consideration and on just principles, acknowledged, we could not view any interposition [interference] for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling in any other manner their destiny, by any European power, in any other light than as the manifestation [expression] of an unfriendly disposition towards the United States.

—James Monroe, December 2, 1823

Which statement BEST explains why James Monroe proposed this foreign policy position?

The U.S. planned to establish colonies of its own through Latin America.

European efforts to regain control in Latin America threatened U.S. interests.

The U.S. had signed military alliances with several Latin American countries.

European actions in Latin America violated agreements to respect human rights.

Which action BEST describes the purpose of the Monroe Doctrine?

forming alliances that avoid conflicts among rival European powers

establishing permanent colonial settlements in distant countries

intervening to prevent European involvement in regional affairs

offering aid to developing countries experiencing economic hardships

Why was the storming of the Bastille influential to the start of the French Revolution?

Because it freed many political prisoners

Because it made the king realize he had lost power over the people

Because it was Napoleon’s first important military victory

Because it resulted in the death of King Louis XVI

Which of the following types of governments best represents Napoleon Bonaparte's rule of France?

A Dictatorship

A Democracy

Which leader’s ideas of imperialism and militarism brought stability and order to revolutionary France?

How did the French invasion of Spain under Napoleon affect the Spanish colonies in the Americas?

Several colonies started to rebel to gain independence from Spain.

French armies attempted to seize control over Spanish colonies.

Spanish forces seized control of French colonial territories.

Several colonies voted to offer allegiance to France.

Why did the French people support Napoleon Bonaparte?

They hoped he would adopt the ideas of the Protestant Reformation.

The people hoped he would restore King Louis XVI to power.

The people hoped he would provide stability for the nation.

They hoped he would end British control of France.

Based on the information below, the Congress of Vienna led to which reaction in Europe in the short-term?

Goals of the Congress of Vienna, 1814-1815

• Restore balance of power so that European countries would not be threats to one another.

• Restore royal families to the thrones held before Napoleon conquests.

• Prevent further French aggression by surrounding France with strong countries.

the rise of a dominant imperial power in Europe

the decline of military alliances in Europe

the expansion of democratic institutions in Europe

the increase of nationalism throughout Europe

Explore all questions with a free account

Continue with email

Continue with phone