Duiker W.J., Spielvogel J.J. The Essential World History. Volume 2: Since 1500

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

alliance with Austria. The ending of the alliance brought

France and Russia together, and in 1894, the two powers

concluded a military alliance. During the next ten years,

German policies abroad caused the British to draw closer

to France. By 1907, an alliance of Great Britain, France,

and Russia---known as the Triple Entente---stood opposed

to the Triple Alliance of Germany, Austria-Hungary, and

Italy. Europe became divided into two opposing camps

that became more and more inflexible and unwilling to

compromise. A series of crises in the Balkans between

1908 and 1913 set the stage for World War I.

Crisis in the Balkans Over the course of the nine-

teenth century, the Balkan provinces of the Ottoman

Empire had gradu-

ally gained their

freedom, although

the rivalry in the re-

gion between Austria

and Russia compli-

cate d the process. By

1878, Greece, Serbia,

and Romania had

become independent

states. Although freed

from Ottoman rule,

Montenegro was

placed under an

Austrian protector-

ate, while Bulgaria

achieved autonomous status under Russian protection.

Bosnia and Herzegovina were placed under Austrian

protection; Austria could occupy but not annex them.

Nevertheless, in 1908, Austria did annex the two

Slavic-speaking territories. Serbia was outraged because

the annexation dashed the Serbs’ hopes of creating a

large Serbian kingdom that would unite most of the

southern Slavs. The Russian s, as protectors of their

fellow Slavs, supported the Serbs and opposed the

Austrian action. Backed by the Russians, the Serbs

prepared for war against Austria. At this point, William

II inter vened and demanded that the Russians accept

Austria’s annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina or face

war with Germany. Weakened from their defeat in the

Russo- Japanese War in 1904--1905, the Russians backed

down but vowed re venge. Two wars between the Balkan

states in 1912--1913 fur ther embittered the inhabitants

of the region and generated more tensions among the

gre at powers.

Serbia’s desire to create a large Serbian kingdom

remained unfulfilled. In their frustration, Serbian na-

tionalists blamed the Austrians. Austria-Hungary was

convinced that Serbia was a mortal threat to its empire

and must at some point be crushed. As Serbia’s chief

supporters, the Russians were determined not to back

down again in the event of a confrontation with Austria or

Germany in the Balkans. The allies of Austria-Hungary

and Russia were also determined to be more supportive of

their respective allies in another crisis. By the beginning of

1914, two armed camps viewed each other with suspicion.

Black

Sea

GERMANY

ITALY

GREECE

SERBIA

ALBANIA

MONTENEGRO

BULGARIA

ROMANIA

RUSSIA

AUSTRIA-HUNGARY

BOSNIA AND

HERZEGOVINA

Tirana

Vienna

Belgrade

Sarajevo

Budapest

Athens

Constantinople

Bucharest

Sofia

Gallipoli

Sicily

Crete

MACEDONIA

TRANSYLVANIA

0 100 200 Miles

0 100 200 300 Kilometers

The Ba lkans i n 1913

CONCLUSION

THE FORCES UNLEASHED between 1800 and 1870 by

two revolutions---the French Revoluti on and the Industrial

Revolution---led to Western global dominance by the en d of the

nineteent h century. The First and Secon d Industrial Revolutions

seemed to prove to Europ eans the underlying assumption of the

Scientific Revolution of the seventeenth century---that human

beings were capable of dominating nature. By rationally

manipulating the ma terial environment for human benefit, people

could achieve new levels of material prosperity and produce

machines hithe rto not dreamed of in their wildest imaginings.

Some of these new machines included weapons of war that

enabled the Western world to devastate and dominate non-

Western civilizations.

In 1815, a conservative order had been reestablished

throughout Europe, but the revolutionary waves in Europ e in the

first half of the nineteenth century made it clear that the ideologies

of liberalism and nationalism, unleashed by the French Revolution

and now reinforced by the spread of industrialization, were still

alive and active. Between 1850 and 1871, the national state became

the focus of people’s loyalty. Wars, both foreign and civil, were

fought to create unified nation-states, and both wars and changing

political alignments ser ved as catalysts for domestic reforms that

made the nation-state the center of attention. Liberal nationalists

had believed that unified nation-states would preserve individual

rights and lead to a greater community of peoples. But the new

nationalism of the late nineteenth centur y, loud and patriotic, did

not unify peoples but divided them instead as the new national

states became embroiled in bitter competition after 1871.

Between 1871 and 1914, the national state began to expand

its functions beyond all previous limits. Fearful of the growth of

socialism and trade unions, governments attempted to appease

the working masses by adopting such social insurance measures

as compensation for accidents, illness, and old age. These social

welfare measures provided only limited benefits before 1914, but

they signaled a new direction for state action to benefit all

citizens.

486 CHAPTER 19 THE BEGINNINGS OF MODERNIZATION

SUGGESTED READING

The Industrial Revolution and Its Impact Still a good

introduction to the Industrial Revolution is the well-written work by

D. Landes, The Unbound Prometheus: Technological Change and

Industrial Development in Western Europe from 1750 to the

Present (Cambridge, 1969). Also valuable is J. Horn, The Industrial

Revolution (Westport, Conn., 2007). For a broader perspective, see

P. Stearns, The Industrial Revolution in World History (Boulder,

Colo., 1993). On the role of the British, see K. Morgan, The Birth

of Industrial Britain: Social Change, 1750--1850 (New York, 2004).

On the social impact of the Industrial Revolution, see P. Pilbeam,

The Middle Classes in Europe, 1789--1914 (Basingstoke, England,

1990), and J. G. Williamson, Coping with City Growth During the

British Industrial Revolution (Cambridge, 2002).

TIMELINE

1770

1800 1830 1860 1890 1920

Beginning of the Industrial Revolution in Britain

Stephenson's Rocket

Bell invents the telephone

Mass production of

Ford's Model T

Revolutions of 1848

Unification of Italy

Emancipation of Russian serfs

Unification of Germany

Bismarck as chancellor of Germany

Beginning of Third Republic in France

Triple Alliance

Triple Entente

Congress of Vienna

This extension of state functions took place in an atmosphere

of increased national loyalty. After 1871, nation-states increasingly

sought to solidify the social order and win the active loyalty and

support of their citizens by deliberately cultivating national feelings.

Yet this policy contained potentially great dangers. Nations had

discovered once again that imperialistic adventures and military

successes could arouse nationalistic passions and smother domestic

political unrest. But they also found---belatedly in 1914---that

nationalistic feelings could also lead to intense international

rivalries that made war almost inevitable.

CONCLUSION 487

The Growth of Industrial Prosperity The Second Industrial

Revolution is well covered in D. Landes, The Unbound Prometheus.

For a fundamental survey of European industrialization, see A. S.

Milward and S. B. Saul, The Development of the Economies of

Continental Europe, 1850--1914 (Cambridge, Mass., 1977). On

Marx, the standard work is D. McLellan, Karl Marx: His Life and

Thought, 4th ed. (New York, 2006). See also F. Wheen, Karl Marx:

A Life (New York, 2001).

The Growth of Nationalism, 1814--1848 For a good survey

of the nineteenth century, see R. Gildea, Barricades and Borders:

Europe, 1800--1914, 3rd ed. (Oxford, 2003). Also valuable is

T. C. W. Blanning, ed., Nineteenth Century: Europe, 1789--1914

(Oxford, 2000). For a survey of the period 1814--1848, see

M. Broers, Europe After Napoleon: Revolution, Reaction, and

Romanticism, 1814--1848 (New York, 1996), and M. Lyons,

Postrevolutionary Europe, 1815--1856 (New York, 2006). The best

introduction to the revolutions of 1848 is J. Sperber, The European

Revolutions, 1848--1851, 2nd ed. (New York, 2005).

National Unification and the National State, 1848--1871 The

unification of Italy can be examined in B. Derek and E. F. Biagini,

The Risorgimento and the Unification of Italy, 2nd ed. (London,

2002), and H. Hearder, Cavour (New York, 1994). The unification

of Germany can be pursued first in two good biographies of

Bismarck, E. Crankshaw, Bismarck (New York, 1981), and

E. Feuchtwanger, Bismarck (London, 2002). For a good

introduction to the French Second Empire, see J. F. McMillan,

Napoleon III (New York, 1991). On the Austrian Empire, see

R. Okey, The Habsburg Monarchy (New York, 2001). Imperial

Russia is covered in T. Chapman, Imperial Russia, 1801--1905

(London, 2001). On Victorian Britain, see W. L. Arnstein,

Queen Victoria (New York, 2005), and I. Machlin, Disraeli

(London, 1995).

The European State, 1871--1914 On Britain, see D. Read,

The Age of Urban Democracy: England, 1868--1914 (New York,

1994). For a detailed examination of French history from 1871 to

1914, see J.-M. Mayeur and M. Reberioux, The Third Republic

from Its Or igins to the Great War, 1871--1914 (Cambridge, 1984).

On Germany, see W. J. Mommsen, Imperial Germany, 1867--1918

(New York, 1995), and E. Feuchtwanger, Imperial Germany, 1850--

1918 (London, 2001). On aspects of Russian history, see H. Rogger,

Russia in the Age of Modernization and Revolution, 1881--1917

(London, 1983), and A. Ascher, Revolution of 1905: A Short

History (Stanford, Calif., 2004).

Visit the website for The Essential World History to access study

aids such as Flashcards, Critical Thinking Exercises, and

Chapter Quizzes:

www.cengage.com/history/duikspiel/essentialworld6e

488 CHAPTER 19 THE BEGINNINGS OF MODERNIZATION

489

CHAPTER 20

THE AMERICAS AND SOCIETY AND CULTURE IN THE WEST

CHAPTER OUTLINE

AND FOCUS QUESTIONS

Latin America in the Nineteenth and Early

Twentieth Centuries

What role did liberalism and nationalism play in Latin

America between 1800 and 187 0? What were the major

economic, social, and political trends in Latin America

in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries?

The North American Neighbors:

The United States and Canada

What role did nationalism and liberalism play in the

United States and Canada between 1800 and 1870? What

economic, social, and political trends were evident in the

United States and Canada between 1870 and 1914?

The Emergence of Mass Society

What is meant by the term mass society, and what were

its main characteristics?

Cultural Life: Romanticism and Realism

in the Western World

What were the main characteristics of Romanticism and

Realism?

Toward the Modern Consciousness:

Intellectual and Cultural Developments

What intellectual and cultural developments in the late

nineteenth and early twentieth centuries ‘‘opened the

way to a modern consciousness,’’ and how did this

consciousness differ from earlier worldviews?

CRITICAL THINKING

In what ways were the intellectual and cultural

developments in the Western world between 1800 and

1914 related to the economic, social, and political

developments?

A portrait of Toussaint L’Ouverture, leader of the Haitian

independence movement



North Wind Picture Archives

490

NATIONALISM---one of the major forces for change in Europe in

the nineteenth century---also affected Latin America as the colonial

peoples there overthrew their Spanish and Portuguese masters and

began the process of creating new national states. An unusual revo-

lution in Haiti preceded the main independence movements. Pierre

Dominique Toussaint L’Ouverture, the grandson of an African king,

was born a slave in Saint-Domingue---the western third of the island

of Hispaniola, a French sugar colony---in 1746. Educated by his god-

father, Toussaint was able to amass a small private fortune through

his own talents and the generosity of his French master. When black

slaves in Saint-Domingue, inspired by news of the French Revolu-

tion, revolted in 1791, Toussaint became their leader. For years,

Toussaint and his ragtag army struck at the French. By 1801, after

his army had come to control Saint-Domingue, Toussaint assumed

the role of ruler and issued a constitution that freed all slaves.

But Napoleon Bonaparte refused to accept Toussaint’s control

of France’s richest colony and sent a French army of 23,000 men

under General Leclerc, his brother-in-law, to crush the rebellion.

Although yellow fever took its toll on the French, the superior size

and weapons of their army enabled them to gain the upper hand.

Toussaint was tricked into surrendering in 1802 with Leclerc’s

Latin America in the Nineteenth

and Early Twentieth Centuries

Focus Questions: What role did liberalism and

nationalism play in Latin America between 1800 and

1870? What were the major economic, social, and

political trends in Latin America in the late nineteenth

and early twentieth centuries?

The Spanish and Portuguese colonial empires in Latin

America had been integrated into the traditional monar-

chical structure of Europe for centuries. When that

structure was challenged, first by the ideas of the

Enlightenment and then by the upheavals of the Napo-

leonic era, Latin America encountered the possibility of

change. How it responded to that possibility, however, was

determined in part by conditions unique to the region.

The Wars for Independence

By the end of the eighteenth century, the ideas of the

Enlightenment and the new political ideals stemming

from the successful revolution in North America were

beginning to influence the creole elites (descendants of

Europeans who became permanent inhabitants of Latin

America). The principles of the equality of all people in

the eyes of the law, free trade, and a free press proved very

attractive. Sons of creoles, such as Simo

n Bolı

var and Jos



de San Martı

n, who became leaders of the independence

movement, even went to European universities, where

they imbibed the ideas of the Enlightenment.

Nationalistic Revolts in Latin America The creole

elites soon began to use their new ideas to denounce the

rule of the Iberian monarchs and the peninsulars

(Spanish and Portuguese officials who resided in Latin

America for political and economic gain). As Bolı

var said

in 1815, ‘‘It would be easier to have the two continents

meet than to reconcile the spirits of Spain and America.’’

When Napoleon Bonaparte toppled the monarchies of

Spain and Portugal, the authority of the Spaniards and

Portuguese in their colonial empires was weakened, and

between 1807 and 1825, a series of revolts enabled most

of Latin America to become independent.

The first revolt was actually a successful slave rebel-

lion. As we have seen, Toussaint L’Ouverture (1746--1803)

led a revolt of more than 100,000 black slaves and seized

control of all of Hispaniola. On January 1, 1804, the

western part of the island, now called Haiti, announced

its freedom and became the first independent postcolo-

nial state in Latin America.

Beginning in 1810, Mexico, too, experienced a revolt,

fueled initially by the desire of the creole elites to over-

throw the rule of the peninsulars. The first real hero of

Mexican independence was Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla, a

parish priest in a small v illage about 100 miles from

Mexico City. Hidalgo had studied the French Revolution

and roused the local Indians and mestizos, many of

whom were suffering from a major famine, to free

themselves from the Spanish. On September 16, 1810, a

crowd of Indians and mestizos, armed with clubs, ma-

chetes, and a few guns, quickly formed a mob army to

attack the Spaniards, shouting, ‘‘Long live independence

and death to the Spaniards.’’ But Hidalgo was not a good

organizer, and his forces were soon crushed. A military

court sentenced Hidalgo to death, but his memory lived

on. In fact, September 16, the first day of the uprising, is

celebrated as Mexico’s Independence Day.

The participation of Indians and mestizos in

Mexico’s revolt against Spanish control frightened both

creoles and peninsulars. Fearful of the masses, they co-

operated in defeating the popular revolutionary forces.

The elites---both creoles and peninsulars---then decided to

overthrow Spanish rule as a way of preserving their own

power. They selected a creole military leader, Augustı

nde

Iturbide, as their leader and the first emperor of Mexico

in 1821. The new government fostered neither political

nor economic changes, and it soon became apparent that

Mexican independence had benefited primarily the creole

elites.

LATIN AMERICA IN THE NINETEENTH AND EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURIES 491

promise: ‘‘You will not find a more sincere friend than myself.’’ What

a friend! Toussaint was arrested, put in chains, and shipped to

France, where he died a year later in a dungeon. The western part of

Hispaniola, now called Haiti, however, became the first independent

state in Latin America when Toussaint’s lieutenants drove out the

French forces in 1804. Haiti was only one of a number of places in

the Americas where new nations were formed during the nineteenth

century. Indeed, nation building was prominent in North America as

the United States and Canada expanded.

As national states in both the Western Hemisphere and Europe

were evolving in the nineteenth century, significant changes were oc-

curring in society and culture. The rapid economic changes of the

nineteenth century led to the emergence of mass society in the West-

ern world, which meant improvements for the lower classes, who

benefited from the extension of voting rights, a better standard of

living, and universal education. The coming of mass societ y also cre-

ated new roles for the governments of nation-states, which now fos-

tered national loyalty, created mass armies by conscription, and took

more responsibility for public health and housing measures in their

cities. Cultural and intellectual changes paralleled these social devel-

opments, and after 1870, Western philosophers, writers, and artists

began exploring modern cultural expressions that questioned tradi-

tional ideas and increasingly provoked a crisis of confidence.

Independence movements elsewhere in Latin Amer-

ica were likewise the work of elites---primarily creoles---

who overthrew Spanish rule and set up new governments

that they could dominate. Jos



e de San Martı

n (1778--

1850) of Argentina and Simo

n Bolı

var (1783--1830) of

Venezuela, leaders of the independence movement, were

both members of the creole elite, and both were hailed as

the liberators of South America.

The Efforts of Bolı

var and San Martı

n Simo

nBolı

var

has long been regarded as the George Washington of

Latin America. Born into a wealthy Venezuelan family, he

was introduced as a young man to the ideas of the En-

lightenment. While in Rome in 1805 to witness the cor-

onation of Napoleon as king of Italy, he committed

himself to free his people from Spanish control. He

vowed, ‘‘I swear before the God of my fathers, by my

fathers themselves, by my honor and by my country, that

my arm shall not rest nor my mind be at peace until I

have broken the chains that bind me by the will and

power of Spain.’’

When he returned to South America,

Bolı

var began to lead the bitter struggle for independence

in Venezuela as well as other parts of northern South

America. Although he was acclaimed as the ‘‘liberator’’ of

Venezuela in 1813 by the people, it was not until 1821

that he definitively defeated Spanish forces there. He went

on to liberate Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru. Already in

1819, he had become president of Venezuela, at the time

part of a federation that included Colombia and Ecuador.

Bolı

var was well aware of the difficulties in establishing

stable republican governments in Latin America (see the

box on p. 493).

While Bolı

var was busy liberating northern South

America from the Spanish, Jos



e de San Martı

nwascon-

centrating his efforts on the southern part of the continent.

Son of a Spanish army officer in Argentina, San Martı

himself went to Spain and pursued a military career in the

Spanish army. In 1811, after serving twenty-two years, he

learned of the liberation movement in his native Argentina,

abandoned his military career in Spain, and returned to his

homeland in March 1812. Argentina had already been

freed from Spanish control, but San Martı

n believed that

the Spaniards must be remov ed from all of South America

if any nation was to be free. In January 1817, he led his



The Art Archive/Museo Nacional de Historia, Lima, Peru/Gianni Dagli Orti



Superstock

The Liberators of South America. Jos



e de San Martı

n and Simo

n Bolı

var are hailed as the leaders

of the South American independence movement. In the painting on the left, by Theodore G



ericault, a French

Romantic painter, San Martı

n is shown leading his troops at the Battle of Chacabuco in Chile in 1817. The

painting on the right shows Bolı

var leading his troops across the Andes in 1823 to fight in Peru. This

depiction of perfectly uniformed troops moving in neat formation through the snow of the Andes, by the

Chilean artist Franco Gomez, is, of course, highly unrealistic.

492 CHAPTER 20 THE AMERICAS AND SOCIETY AND CULTURE IN THE WEST

forces over the high Andes Mountains, an amazing feat in

itself. Two-thirds of their pack mules and horses died

during the difficult journey. Man y of the soldiers suffered

from lack of oxygen and sever e cold while crossing

mountain passes more than 2 miles above sea level. The

arrival of San Martı

n’s troops in Chile completely surprised

theSpaniards,whoseforceswereroutedattheBattleof

Chacabuco on February 12, 1817.

In 1821, San Martı

n moved on to Lima, Peru, the

center of Spanish authority. Convinced that he was unable

to complete the liberation of all of Peru, San Martı

welcomed the arrival of Bolı

var and his forces. As he wrote

to Bolı

var, ‘‘For me it would have been the height of

happiness to end the war of independence under the or-

ders of a general to whom [South] America owes its

freedom. Destiny orders it otherwise, and one must resign

oneself to it.’’

Highly disappointed, San Martı

nleftSouth

America for Europe, where he remained until his death

in 1850. Mean while, Bolı

var took on the task of crushing the

last significant Spanish army at Ayacucho on December 9,

1824. By then, Peru, Uruguay, Paraguay, Colombia, Ven-

ezuela, Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile had all become free

states (see Map 20.1). In 1823, the Central American states

became independent and in 1838--1839 divided into five

republics (Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Costa Rica,

and Nicaragua). Earlier, in 1822, the prince regent of

Brazil had declared Brazil’s independence from Portugal.

Independence and the Monroe Doctrine In the early

1820s, only one major threat remained to the newly won

independence of the Latin American states. Reveling in

their success in crushing rebellions in Spain and Italy, the

victorious continental European powers favored the use

of troops to restore Spanish control in Latin America.

This time, Britain’s opposition to intervention prevailed.

Eager to gain access to an entire continent for investment

SIMO

N B OLI

VA R O N GOVERNMENT IN LATIN AMERICA

Simo

n Bolı

var is acclaimed as the man who liber-

ated Latin America from Spanish control. His inter-

est in history and the ideas of the Enlightenment

also led him to speculate on how Latin American

nations would be governed after their freedom was obtained.

This selection is taken from a letter written to the British

governor of Jamaica.

Simo

n Bolı

var, The Jamaica Letter

It is ...difficult to foresee the future fate of the New World, to set

down its political principles, or to prophesy what manner of govern-

ment it will adopt. ... We inhabit a world apart, separated by broad

seas. We are young in the ways of almost all the arts and sciences,

although in a certain manner, we are old in the ways of civilized

society. ... But we scarcely retain a vestige of what once was; we

are, moreover, neither Indian nor European, but a species midway

between the legitimate proprietors of this country and the Spanish

usurpers. In short, thoug h Americans by birth we derive our rights

from Europe, and we have to assert these rights against the rights of

the natives, and at the same time we must defend ourselves against

the invaders. This places us in a most extraordinary and involved

situation. ...

The role of the inhabitants of the American hemisphere has

for centuries been purely passive. Politically they were non-existent.

We are still in a position lower than s lavery, and therefore it i s

more difficult for us to rise to the enjoyment of freedom. ... States

are slaves because of either the nature or the misuse of their con-

stitutions; a peop le is therefore enslaved when the government , by

its nature or its vices, infringes on and usurps the rights of the

citizen or subject. Applying these principles, we find that America

was denied not only its freedom but even an active and effective

tyranny. ...

It is harder, Montesquieu has written, to release a nation from

servitude than to enslave a free nation. This truth is proven by the

annals of all times, which reveal that most free nations have been put

under the yoke, but very few enslaved nations have recovered their

liberty. Despite the convictions of history, South Americans have

made efforts to obtain liberal, even perfect, institutions, doubtless out

of that instinct to aspire to the greatest possible happiness, which,

common to all men, is bound to follow in civil societies founded on

the principles of justice, liberty, and equality. But are we capable of

maintaining in proper balance the difficult charge of a republic? Is it

conceivable that a newly emancipated people can soar to the heights

of liberty ...? Such a marvel is inconceivable and without precedent.

There is no reasonable probability to bolster our hopes.

More than anyone, I desire to see America fashioned into the

greatest nation in the world, greatest not so much by virtue of her

area and wealth as by her freedom and glory. Although I seek per-

fection for the government of my country, I cannot persuade myself

that the New World can, at the moment, be organized as a great re-

public. Since it is impossible, I dare not desire it; yet much less do I

desire to have all America a monarchy because this plan is not only

impracticable but also impossible. Wrongs now existing could not

be righted, and our emancipation would be fruitless. The American

states need the care of paternal governments to heal the sores and

wounds of despotism and war.

What problems did Bolı

var foresee for Spanish America’s

political future? Do you think he believed in democracy? Why or

why not?

LATIN AMERICA IN THE NINETEENTH AND EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURIES 493

and trade, the British proposed joint action with the

United States against European interference in Latin

America. Distrustful of British motives, President James

Monroe acted alone in 1823, guaranteeing the indepen-

dence of the new Latin American nations and warning

against any further European intervention in the Amer-

icas under what is know n as the Monroe Doctrine. Even

more important to Latin American independence than

American words was Britain’s navy. All of the continental

European powers were reluctant to challenge British naval

power, which stood between Latin America and any

European invasion force.

The Difficulti es of Nation Building

As Simo

nBolı

var had foreseen, the new Latin American

nations, most of which began as republics, faced

a number of serious problems between 1830 and 1870.

aci

cean

anti

cean

tla

tic

cea

BRAZIL

(1822)

(

)

OLIVIA

(

1825

)

(182

COLOMB

(1819)

(183

)

VEVE

(

181

)

(

GENTINA

)

URUR

UGUG

)

ITI

IANA

UTC

Janeiro

Mon

tevideo

Bueno

ires

San

tiago

BogotáBogotá

Car

aca

Car

CarCar

aca

Car

acaaca

aca

Lima

Asu

nci

ón

(1830)

500 1

000 Mile

00 1,000 1,

00 Kilometers

MEXI

(

1821

)

RITISH

HONDURAS

Cuba

Cub

Jama

MOSQUITO

COAST (BR.)

GUAT

ATE

EMALA

(1838)

38)

ALVAD

(1838)

HONDURAS

838)

(1838)

NICARAGUA

NICARAG

(1838)

COSTA RICA

OSTA RI

OST

(1838

1838)

1838

HAITI

ITI

)

804)

(1804)

)

04)

804)

MINI

BLI

(1844)

OLOMBIA

ogot

250 500 Miles

0 2

00 7

0 Kilometers

MAP 20.1 Latin Ame rica in the First Half of the Nineteenth Cen tury. Latin American

colonies took advantage of Spain’s weakness during the Napoleonic wars to fight for

independence, beginning with Argentina in 1810 and spreading throughout the region over the

next decade with the help of leaders like Simo

n Bolı

var and Jos



e de San Martı

How many South American countries are sources of rivers that feed the Amazon, and

roughly what percentage of the continent is contained within the Amazon ’s watershed?

494 CHAPTER 20 THE AMERICAS AND SOCIETY AND CULTURE IN THE WEST

The wars for independence had themselves resulted in a

staggering loss of population, property, and livestock. At

the same time, disputes arose between nations over their

precise boundaries.

Political Difficulti es The new nations of Lati n Amer-

ica established republican governments, but they had

had no experience in ruling themselves. Due to the in-

securities prevalent after independence, strong leaders

known a s caudillos came to power. National caudillos

were ge nerally one of two types. One group, who sup-

ported the elites, consisted of autocrats who controlled

(and often abused) state revenues, centralized power,

and kept the new national states together. So metimes

they were also modernizers who built roads and canals,

ports, and schools. These caudillos were usually sup-

ported by the Catholic church, the rural aristocracy, and

the army, which emerged from the wars of independence

as a powerful political force that often made and de-

posed governments. Many caudillos, in fact, were former

army leaders.

In contrast, other caudillos were supported by the

masses, became extremely popular, and served as instru-

ments for radical change. J uan Manuel de Rosas, for ex-

ample, who led Argentina from 1829 to 1852, became very

popular by fav oring Argentine interests against foreigners.

Economic Patterns Although political independence

brought economic independence, old patterns were

quickly reestablished. Instead of Spain and Portugal,

Great Britain now dominated the Latin American econ-

omy. Old trade patterns soon reemerged. Since Latin

America served as a source of raw materials and food-

stuffs for the industrializing nations of Europe and the

United States, exports---especially wheat, tobacco, wool,

sugar, coffee, and hides---to the North Atlantic countries

increased noticeably. At the same time, finished consumer

goods, especially textiles, were imported in increasing

quantities, causing a decline in industrial production in

Latin America.

Social Conditions A fundamental underly ing problem

for all of the new Latin American nations was the

persistent domination of society by the landed elites.

Large estates remained an important aspect of Latin

America’s economic and social life. After independence,

the size of these estates expanded even more. By 1848,

the S



anchez Navarro family in Mexico owned seventeen

haciendas (plantations) covering 16 million ac res.

Estates were often so large that they could not be

farmed efficiently. As one Latin American newspaper

put it, ‘‘ The huge fortunes have the unfortunate ten-

dency to grow even larger, and their owners possess vast

tracts of land, which lie fallow and abandoned. Their

greed for land does not equal their ability to use it

intelligently and actively.’’

Land remained the basis of wealth, social prestige,

and political power throughout the nineteenth century.

The Latin American elites tended to identify with Eu-

ropean standards of progress, which worked to their

benefit, while the masses gained little. Landed elites ran

governments, controlled courts, and maintai ned the

system of debt peonage that provided large landow ners

with a supply of cheap labor. These landowners made

enormous profits by concentrating on specialized crops

for expor t, such as coffee, while the masses, left w ithout

land to grow basic f ood crops, l ived in dire poverty.

Tradition and Change in the Latin American

Economy and Society

After 1870, Latin America began to experience an era of

rapid economic growth based to a large extent on the

export of a few basic items, such as wheat and beef from

Argentina, coffee from Brazil, nitrates from Chile, coffee

and bananas from Central America, and sugar and silver

from Peru. These foodstuffs and raw materials were ex-

changed for finished goods---textiles, machines, and lux-

ury goods---from Europe and the United States. Despite

their economic grow th, Latin American nations remained

economic colonies of Western nations.

Old patterns also still largely prevailed in society.

Rural elites dominated their estates and their workers.

Although slavery was abolished by 1888, former slaves

and their descendants were at the bottom of their society.

The Indians remained poverty-stricken.

One result of the new prosperity that came from

increased exports w as growth in the middle sectors of

Latin American society---l awyers, merchants, shop-

keepers, businesspeople, schoolteache rs, professors, bu-

reaucrats, and military officers. These middle sectors,

which ma de up only 5 to 10 percent of the popula tion,

depending on the country, were hardly large enough in

numbers to constitute a true middle class. Nevertheless,

after 1900, the middle sectors continued to expand.

They lived in the cities, sought education and decent

incomes, and increasingly saw the United States as the

model to emulate, especially in regard to industrializa-

tion and education.

As Latin American export economies boomed, the

working class expanded, which in turn led to the growth

of labor unions, especially after 1914. Radical unions often

advocated the use of the general strike as an instrument

for change. By and large, however, the governing elites

succeeded in stifling the political influence of the working

class by restricting workers’ right to vote.

LATIN AMERICA IN THE NINETEENTH AND EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURIES 495