Mary Holmes

Dr. Cromwell
History 392; Paper #3
30 April 2014
The Dissolution of the Spanish Empire from the Inside Out
The disintegration of the Spanish Empire was a gradual disengagement between the
colonies and the Spanish government. External and internal factors were both at play during the
empires unravelling, leaving the empire so divided after a time that the eventual split was
seemingly inevitable. Problems internally stemmed from things like the Bourbon Reforms and
the developing creole identity. While externally, problems arose from the subsequent effects of
the Napoleonic Wars and new ideals from the Enlightenment. The combination of all the
aforementioned factors proved lethal to the Spanish Empire as each piece worked in tandem with
the next to fracture its stability. However, it was the internal problems which ultimately brought
about the end of Spanish rule in Latin America and proved too stressful for the once dominant
empire.
From 1763- 1810, the Bourbon Reforms sought to make right the growing corruption and
lacking economic productivity which were noticeably weakening the Spanish Empire. These
internal issues were further highlighted after events like the Seven Years War and the Siege of
Havana occurred. Such events gave the new Bourbon dynasty the perfect platform to launch
reforms in an effort to alleviate the Spanish Empires problems in the hopes of then rebuilding
the empire to its prior prestige. These improvements were known as the Bourbon Reforms.
However, despite having the intention of strengthening the empire and repairing its fissures,
they were instead perceived to wield a double edged sword by colonists, and perhaps more
importantly, creoles. The expulsion of the Jesuits as well as the marriage laws provide two

specific examples of how the reforms provisions would aggrieve colonists to a greater degree
than Spaniards.
The expulsion of the Jesuits occurred because the now French allied government sought
to depress the ties between the Catholic church and the Spanish government. In lecture it was
explained that the Jesuits held vast amounts of wealth and influence, as well as also being a
separate entity from the crown. Additionally, they were a beloved and key part of Spanish
colonial society and served as educators. But after the Riots of 1766, which arguably placed
unfair blame on the Jesuits, they were no longer a welcome part of Spanish society colonial or
otherwise. This was especially disheartening for the colonists of Latin America because
education aided in both social movement and creating future societal elites.
The ladder was key in a society that placed heavy value on a hierarchal system. However,
the expulsion of the Jesuits was not what completely crippled societal movement in the colonies.
Instead, it was the new marriage laws. These laws would no longer tolerate racially mixed
marriages. And while in Spain, where people are generally racially homogenous compared to
those in Latin America, such revisions were not as angering to people on the Iberian peninsula.
Conversely, in Latin America these new restrictions were outlandish. Not only did different races
exist but they coexisted and mingled. Unions that prevented that were seen as disparaging to its
current societal structure. So then, in addition to lacking in education for future societal leaders
and elites, colonists- and more specifically creoles- had no real vessel for societal betterment.
Changes and restrictions such as the ones named above began to provide colonists with a
commonality that had until the late 18th and early 19th century not been relevant: the American
identity. This is thematic of John Chasteens book, Americanos, which was aptly named as it
explains in great detail the shift from being a Spanish subject to becoming an americano.

Until 1807-8, when Napoleonic invasions of Portugal and Spain unleashed a crisis in
America, americano was a term generally denoting whites only. But by the time dust
settled in 1825, years of bloodshed had transformed the meaning of americano,
stretching the term around people of indigenous and African and mixed descent, the
large majority of the population. The transformation happened as patriot generals,
poets, and orators described their struggle as the cause of America and called
americanos to join it. (Chasteen, p. 1-2)
This shift happened largely because of demographic changes happening in the New World during
this time. The total population in Latin America was growing exponentially, and in turn, so were
castas. As a result, the gap was widening between the elite and impoverished economically, and
mixed races were obscuring traditionally linked racial identities to certain socioeconomic classes.
Meaning, a penisulare could be a member of the lower or middle class while creoles could
outrank them in the same community.
This was confusing for people on the Iberian Peninsula, and gave way to beliefs that
claimed Spaniards were inherently better than creoles, which was discussed in lecture. Such
beliefs angered colonists, particularly creoles, and prompted them to prove themselves and their
Latin American culture to the Spanish government. Thus uniting them as more than merely an
indigenous person, creole, mulatto, African or mestizo, and instead combining identities into one
singular term: americano. Thus giving the above quote further relevance, as these now united
people would take on the cause of America. Dr. Cromwell mentioned in lecture how creoles
and castas began to take significant pride in themselves and their local practices. Foods that were
native to Latin America, like corn and chocolate, as well as goods produced within the
boundaries of Latin America became a significant point of pridefulness and dignity. Actions such
as those spoke volumes both then and now, as well as help to illustrate how subjects of the
Spanish crown began to shift identities slowly until they qualified themselves as citizens to more

local rule. The term americanos encapsulates the American identity and all the races that
existed in Latin America.
The diminishing leadership Spain held over Latin America would only be further
weakened by external sources, namely Napoleon. Slowly occupying Spain in the North and
gradually increasing opposition, the widely unpopular King Carlos and Queen Maria Luisa, were
captured alongside son Fernando, and deposed. Carlos and Maria Luisa were exiled to Italy,
while Fernando remained in French captivity for six years. The Spanish people did not want
them back. But Spain did want Fernando, who would remain in French custody for the next six
years, giving his loyal subjects further opportunity to yearn for him as a symbol, the Desired
One, without really knowing him. (p. 46) The key part of that quote being the opportunity to
yearn for him as a symbol. All kings during this time were generally beloved, but at the very
least respected, by all peoples. No Spaniard nor colonist alike was going to willingly submit to a
new regime set up by Napoleon if hope of Fernando returning was alive. So juntas that were still
free from French occupation began to govern in the Spanish monarchs absence. This solution
did not satisfy colonists however, because they were not inclined to submit to juntas anymore
than they were Napoleon. Instead they subscribed to the idea of the mask of Fernando which
would allow local governments already in place in Latin America to carry on as Fernando would
have.
The absence of the king allowed Francisco de Miranda to declare Venezuela as an
independent republic in 1811. Venezuelas first attempt at independence would be short lived but
would inspire young revolutionaries like Simon Bolivar to champion the efforts in years to come.
While Miranda was not exceedingly popular and largely distrusted by the Venezuelan natives,
Bolivar respected and honored Miranda and was eager to begin where he left off. Having been

born into a wealthy Venezuelan family, Bolivar was a creole who received a good education in
Europe during the time of the Enlightenment. When he came home to Latin America he hoped to
continue with the revolutionary efforts and begin practicing his newly learned ideals, like self
determination. Influenced not only by Miranda, but men like Thomas Jefferson and George
Washington, it was mentioned in lecture that Bolivar was in awe of what they achieved and
wanted similar things for Latin America. Like choice in government.
In a final effort to combat Latin American divergence from the crown and other Spanish
rule, the Constitution of Cadiz was later drafted. It would have a profoundly transformed the
Spanish colonial system, limiting the power of the king and creating a permanent system of
electoral representation that included America. The Cadiz constitution confirmed the
compromise formula making americanos, Indians, and anyone else descended from themeveryone without a trace of African descent- citizens of the Spanish nation, juridically equal to
those born in Europe. (p. 91) While it did greatly limit the power of the monarchy and empower
representation of citizens, forming a different kind of monarchy all together, cadiz did not have
the authority to enact this legislature. Furthermore, the exclusion of all people with any trace of
African descent, placed americanos at such a disadvantage that there was no real victory in the
recognition of creoles or other castas. Additionally, when Fernando did return to power he,
turned back the clock of political change restoring all Spanish public officials to offices they
had held when he became king in 1808. (p. 106)
The ending of that paragraph highlighting why the internal factors of the Spanish Empire
held greater influence over its crumbling than external. The Iberian peninsula and its leadership
never treated colonists like the integral part of the empire they were. According to a metaphor
often heard throughout these months, Spain and America were separate and equal pillars of

Fernandos crown. (p. 49) But the lack of respect and representation offered to them in the
juntas or Constitution of cadiz prove that regardless of what men like Napoleon did, colonists
were disgruntled. The second part of that quote ends with, Spanish juntas spoke only for Spain
and New Spain should speak for itself. (p. 49) This was said during Fernandos captivity, and by
the time he returned colonies had declared and began to fight and rally for their independence.
Has Fernando negotiated with the colonies instead of attempting to crush them, especially given
Spains further weakened state after Napoleon, the Spanish Empire may not have tumbled in on
itself as harshly as it did.