Jason Gusdorf 11-26-2013 Latin American History I The Enlightened Revolutions of Spanish America Enlightenment is man s emergence from his self-imposed immaturity. Immaturity is the inability to use one s understanding without guidance from another. This immaturity is selfimposed when its cause lies not in lack of understanding, but in lack of resolve and courage to use it without guidance from another. Sapere Aude! Have courage to use your own understanding. That is the motto of enlightenment. Immanuel Kant, An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment? (1784) In 1808, the Spanish and Portuguese America colonies that had been successfully ruled for almost three-hundred years began to declare independence from their respective rulers. The American and French Revolutions championed the ideals of the Enlightenment, publishing the Declaration of Independence (1776) and the Declaration of the Rights of Man (1789), respectively. The temporal proximity of these events to the wave of Latin American revolutions should make any scholar question similarities in the causal ideologies. An interesting debate has emerged about which ideology spurred the Latin American independence movements. O. Carlos Stoetzer argues that the revolutions were a move against the liberal ideals of the 18 th century European Enlightenment, back towards a more conservative ideology. On the other hand, historians Jaime Rodríguez, and Richard Graham demonstrate that Enlightenment thought was pervasive throughout Latin America and the independence movements were a move towards an Enlightened society, rather than a move away from it. Stoetzer s argument originates from a misunderstanding of what Enlightenment thought actually meant. In essence, it was a broad movement towards
2 reliance upon one s own ability to reason and autonomy. It is evident from this inspection that the revolutions were, in fact, a move towards Enlightenment ideals, not against them. The individual independence movements were motivated by a multitude to complex reasons. Some historians argue that over the 300 years that Spanish colonies existed, a regional nationalism developed that gradually led to a perceived separation between Spain and the colony; this facilitated revolutionary impulses. Other historians point to the class conflict of the criollos and the peninsulares as a rising tension that eventually inflamed into rebellion when the peninsulares were no longer supported by Spain due to Napoleon s invasion. Economic exploitation is another theory. Under the Bourbon reforms, tax collection became more efficient due to an increased military presence, and due to the military situation in Spain taxes were increased substantially. This angered the populations of Spanish America who felt the taxes were unjustified. While these theories are legitimate, they will not be the focus of this paper. The motivations that gave rise to the revolutions in Latin America are extremely complex and interlinked. So, for the purposes of this paper, I will focus only on the ideologies present in Latin America at the time that underlay the movements. Stoetzer disagrees and writes, The revolution which began in 1808-1810 was little influenced by the philosophy of North America or Western Europe; it was based on the political theory of Spanish Late Scholasticism (pactum tranlationis). 1 The general thesis of his work, The Scholastic Roots of the Spanish American Revolution, is that Late Spanish Scholastic political philosophy, as represented by the works of Francis Suárez, Luis de Molina, Juan de Mariana, and Francisco de Vitoria, was responsible for the revolutions, as opposed to the spreading of Enlightenment thought. He examines the idea that if there is no
3 legitimate king, power falls into the hands of the people. This idea, he points out, was from Suárez rather than the Enlightenment: sovereign power originated with the collectivity of men. 2 This notion of sovereignty resting in the people is pactum translationis. This is actually a fairly conservative concept of revolution. While it asserts that power originates from the people, it nevertheless maintains that a rightful monarch has a claim to the throne. Under this concept, the goal of the revolutions was not a radical transformation of society towards the autonomy of the Enlightenment, but rather a conservative effort to return to the Bourbon monarchy. Stoetzer next demonstrates that Enlightenment thought, which he concedes did make an appearance on Spanish soil, was very much the work of a small elite whose main concern was the practical application of useful knowledge and whose members were basically religiously orthodox and politically monarchical. 3 Further, the ideas of the Enlightenment were transformed into the what Stoetzer calls the Hispanic Enlightenment. Exemplifying this distinction is Spanish philosopher and scientist Benedictine Benito Jerónimo Feijóo, who adopted the critical and scientific approach without losing the religious basis. Feijóo books reached 420,000 copies, demonstrating the extent to which his work was dispersed across both the New World and Europe. 4 Essentially, Stoetzer works to make the claim that while the French Enlightenment did appear in Spanish America, its presence was trivial compared to that of Scholastic thought. This seems to contradict his earlier arguments that the Enlightenment could not spread in Spanish America due to the contradiction of natural law definitions. He sees the basis of the French Enlightenment as a different perception of the natural law; one that conflicted with that which was widely understood in Spanish Scholastic thought. The new
4 perception of it was individualistic, mechanistic, atomistic which has little in common with the Scholastic version. In the Scholastic natural law, the autonomy of human reason was not the source of all morality and of all law, 5 but rather God. The difference between Scholastic Latin American thought and Enlightenment thought, as he describes here, is that the former depends more on a God-given natural law and moral code, while the latter finds morality in the autonomy, or self-governance, of the human will. He notes that this is a fundamental contradiction that would make it difficult for them to coexist in Spanish America. In a charitable examination of Stoetzer s work, let us say that his argument is that while some elements of the Enlightenment affected Spanish Scholasticism, it essentially maintained its integrity. Thus attributing the revolutions to Enlightenment thought would be unfair, as its presence was not nearly as great as that of Scholasticism. Stoetzer continues to argue that when the Bourbon reforms threatened to forcefully impose the irreligiosity of the Enlightenment, the people of Spanish America revolted. These reforms main purpose was to motivate technology and manufacturing production to modernize Spain. They also kicked Jesuits out of Spanish America, created a standing army, and attempted to increase Spain s hold on its colonies. He writes, Christian tradition was more important than any reform. The question of religion as to play a great role in the Spanish American Revolution, and the independence would come between 1820 and 1823 as a conservative reaction to liberal Spain. Spanish America became independent because it wanted to remain Spanish in temperament and character, and because Spain seemed to have lost this character through the Bourbon regime and the influence of the European Enlightenment. 6 Essentially, Stoetzer is claiming that the dominant religion of Spanish America caused a conservative reaction to the Bourbon reforms and Enlightenment.
5 In 1808, Napoleon, in an attempt to strengthen his blockade against England, forced Charles IV and Ferdinand VII of Spain to abdicate the Spanish throne and replaced them with his brother, Joseph Bonaparte. Suddenly, revolutions began rising up all over Latin America. Stoetzer uses this to show the Spanish Americans adherence to Scholastic thought by pointing out that Suárezian philosophy dictates the power should return to the people in the case that the rightful monarch is dethroned. This, on top of the growing animosity from the Bourbon reforms, caused the revolutions to begin. Thus, it was not the Enlightenment that spurred the revolutions but rather Spanish American Scholastic thought. In this way, the war for independence was not a war merely against Napoleon s armies, but also a religious war against the ideas of the French Revolution. 7 On the other side of the argument are Jaime Rodríguez and Richard Graham, arguing that the Enlightenment was an important causal factor for the Spanish American Revolutions. Rodríguez s argument focuses on the similarities of Spanish American and Enlightenment thought. He notes that Feijóo looked to increase the production and popularity of scientific achievements. He notes that [Feijóo s] approach was critical, exposing the fallibility of physicians, false saints and miracles, and in all cases advancing the cause of modern political thought. 8 He continues to list off the many periodicals revolving around art, literature, and science that were produced in Spanish America in order to evidence his claim that Enlightenment thought has indeed spread widely throughout the New World. 9 Further on this point, tertulias were social gatherings where people could discuss politics and philosophies, further allowing the dissemination of Enlightenment ideas. While at first tertulias were primarily for the wealthier upper class,
6 the poorer sectors of society quickly began following their lead, which demonstrates that Enlightenment thought was spreading to the common people. 10 Moreover, the educational reforms across Spain and Spanish America reflect the spread of Enlightenment thought. In 1771 under King Charles III, the University of Salamanca, the premier university in Spain, had its curriculum reformed to one that was in line with modern scientific thought. During the 1780s, the College of the Mines, the Botanical Gardens, and the Academy of San Carlos were all established in New Spain as centers of new Enlightenment thought. From this Enlightenment teaching came a strong sense of their rights. 11 Rodríguez uses these attributes of Spanish society to support his claim that the Enlightenment thought was not only prevalent in New Spain, but more importantly caused a clear shift in the people s perception of their relationship to the government. He writes about the post-napoleon invasion, The people of both [Spain and Spanish America] drew upon common concepts and sought similar solutions to the evolving crisis. Inspired by the late eighteenth century and the legal foundations of the Monarchy, most agreed that in the absence of the king, sovereignty reverted to the people, who now possessed the authority and responsibility to defend the nation. 12 Rodríguez is claiming that Spanish political philosophy, of which Enlightenment ideology is was a crucial part, led the Spanish people to believe that power rested in themselves, not the new illegal government of Joseph Bonaparte, which justified their revolutions. Richard Graham agrees with Rodríguez in that the Enlightenment thought profoundly influenced the happenings of Spanish America. He argues that the Enlightenment infused America with new understandings of man and of the world. 13 He references José Celestino Mutis, a Spanish physician to moved to Bogotá, taught math and
7 astronomy at the University, as well as numerous others, as proof that the New World was not an academically isolated place. He writes, The social and political ideas associated with the Enlightenment the social contract between rulers and ruled, the political and economic freedom of the individual, the importance of reason over revelation in guiding social policy, the belief in social education through education also invaded Latin America. [ ] In Spain the ideas of Voltaire and the other French philosophes had been popularized by Benito Feijóo (1676 1764) and although many of the original sources were banned by the Catholic Index of prohibited books, he and other writers spread Enlightenment concepts far and near. 14 It is crucial to note that the ideas spread despite the prohibitions of the Catholic Church. Graham s conclusion similar to Rodríguez s: while the Spanish ideology did not cause the Latin American revolutions by itself, Enlightenment thought transformed the mode of thought into one conducive for revolution. And so, when Napoleon invaded Spain, the opportunity to shift towards a government embodying Enlightened principles presented itself and the Spanish Americans revolted. A closer inspection of what 18 th century European Enlightenment ideology actually is will help us to identify a misunderstanding in Stoetzer s work, and subsequently the source of the disagreement between the two sides of this argument. Enlightenment is centered around the idea of universal equality and a dependence upon one s own reason for answers. However, there is no specific set of ideas that define this movement. Under this broad category are the great names of French, Scottish, English, and German, and American philosophers. 15 It is difficult to express the extent to which these philosophers ideas have shaped our world; if it were easier to do so, perhaps those scholars like Stoetzer would not make claims that the Enlightenment had no impact on the co-occurring revolutions in Latin America. The Enlightenment was a broad, large scale movement away from dependence on authority s knowledge and dogma, towards a dependence on selfreason; this is incredibly broad umbrella that these philosophers fall under, but there is
8 little else that can define them all. Because of this, it is possible for it to adapt to the preexisting Spanish American Scholastic paradigm. This means that Suárez s work, which claims that the basis for just rule lies not in God granted power but rather the power granted from the people as a whole, fits into the Enlightenment mindset. While Stoetzer is right in identifying elements of the Spanish paradigm that could have pushed for a revolution, he is wrong in asserting the mutual exclusivity of those ideas and the ideas of the Enlightenment. Stoetzer uses Suárez s work to provide the sole motivation for rebellion. He wants to use this to show that the people revolted not because of Enlightenment ideology, but rather because of Spanish Scholastic ideology. However, this demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of what the spread of Enlightenment meant. Rather than having to do with esoteric thought done only by academics or priests, the wave of Enlightenment highlighted each individual s ability to rely on their own reason for answers. Rodríguez outlines in depth the spread of universities and periodicals in the New World, citing fourteen separate periodicals in production between 1770 and 1790. 16 This dissemination of academia and critical thought throughout the New World is proof itself of the spreading of the Enlightenment. Furthermore, an examination of the events following Joseph Bonaparte s assumption of power shows Enlightenment ideals that were not expressed by Late Spanish Scholastic thought, meaning that the latter by itself cannot give a complete explanation for the history. Only a dissemination of Enlightenment philosophy can explain the elections of 1809, the resistances against the church, and the subsequent reaction to Ferdinand VII s reassuming power. Soon after the French invasion, local juntas emerged in Spain and Spanish America: small patriotic groups of prominent members of society who sought to rule Spain
9 for themselves, instead of allowing the French to rule it for them. While this at first may seem like nationalism, historian Miguel Artola writes of an overwhelming desire to reassert the sovereignty of the people, clearly seen in the writings of the time. 17 Importantly, it is the sovereignty of the people and not of the monarch. Deciding that solidarity would be important for successful resistance against Bonaparte, the juntas formed a Central Junta out of representatives from all the individual juntas, including those of Spanish America. This representation, which is argued for in Enlightenment thought and seen empirically in both the French and American Revolution, is clear evidence for the spread of Enlightenment thought to Spanish America. As Rodríguez writes, The 1809 elections constituted a profound step forward in the formation of modern representative government for the entire Spanish Nation. 18 The evidence grows even further: the colonies of Spanish America demanded strict equality of their representation in the Junta Central with that of Peninsular Spain. Colombian politician Camilo Torres Tenorio writes in 1810, the provincial juntas of Spain would not agree on the formation of the Junta Central except on the basis of strict equality. 19 This stress on equality is a central characteristic of the Enlightenment, and follows directly from the broader principle of reliance on one s own ability to reason. The similarity in demands for representation between the Spanish American revolutions and the American Revolution is apparent, and noted by Torres. He writes, The true fraternal union between European Spaniards and Americans can never exist except upon the bases of justice and equality [ ] If the English government had taken such an important step, perhaps today it would not rue the separation of its colonies. 20 It is important to note that while these juntas demanded equal representation in the Junta Central, they all declared loyalty to the dethroned Bourbon Ferdinand VII. Stoetzer argues
10 that this piece of evidence demonstrates a reliance on Suárezian rather than Enlightenment thought as all seem to acknowledge that the power rests in the hands of the legitimate heir to the throne. However, this dedication to Ferdinand VII seems only to be a useful force for unification, rather than an ideological devotion to the monarch, as evidenced by how quickly his rule disintegrates as soon as he threatens the newly gained autonomy of Spanish America. Between 1808 and 1810, Peninsular Spain suffered devastating military defeats to the French army, which allowed autonomy, and consequently Enlightenment societal institutions like local representative government, to spread. The Cortés of Cadíz, established on September 24, 1810 as the new ruling body and made up of representatives from both Spain and Spanish America, drafted the Constitution of 1812. This document focused heavily on equality and representation of all Spanish Americans. While there existed people in Spanish America who were more radical in their demands for representation, very few advocated revolution against the Cortés of Cadíz; while there was a potent desire for autonomy, the vast majority preferred change from within the current system. And despite challenges over the complication of the status of Indians and local governance under the local governments called ayuntamientos, the Cortés allowed for legal change and the larger cities appeared to function well under the control of the American middle and upper classes. 21 The move towards revolution began on May 4, 1814 when King Ferdinand VII, after having returned as the Napoleonic wars ended, abolished the Cortés and all of its acts. According to Suárezian thought, Ferdinand, as the rightful heir to the throne, was justified in assuming power. Had that school of thought been dominant in Latin America, people of Spanish America would have acknowledged his right to rule.
11 Instead, after the total collapse of the constitutional government due to Ferdinand s abrogation of its power, territories in Spanish American began to declare their individual independence from Spain. In a complex series of events, Spanish America broke into New Grenada, Patagonia, La Plata and Peru. While the individual history of each is too complex for the purposes of this paper, their common goal was to maintain the autonomy that they had gained in the last four years under a representative democratic system that was being stripped by the reforms of Ferdinand VII. The desires for equality and autonomy demonstrate the dominance of Enlightenment ideology. To conclude the disagreement between these historians, let us look to perhaps the greatest revolutionary of the time: Simon Bolívar. In his famous Jamaica Letter of 1815, he writes, 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. 22 First, the abundantly clear reference to the great Enlightenment philosopher Montesquieu is undeniably evidence of his impact on Bolívar. Secondly, the language he uses in this letter, especially the last sentence that South America has tried to attain institutions are bound to follow in civil societies founded on the principles of justice, liberty, and equality reflects that heard in the American and French Revolutions. The first article of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen published in France in 1789 states, Men are born and remain free and equal in rights. 23 These are defining themes for the European Enlightenment.
12 With this understanding of Enlightenment combined with a deeper understanding of the subsequent events after the initial revolts against the government of Joseph Bonaparte, it is clear that the Enlightenment did indeed push the people of Latin America towards revolution. Its insistence on the diffusion of ideas so that people could learn to think for themselves created a situation where the idea that the public may rule themselves would be viable. The Suárezian philosophy that Stoetzer relies on insufficiently explains the Latin American revolutions. Instead, Enlightenment thought became the dominant ideology that moved the people towards autonomy, and thus towards revolution. When Napoleon removed the Bourbon monarch Charles IV, it gave the people of Spanish America an opportunity to seize autonomy and form their own states with representative government; when this autonomy was threatened by Ferdinand VII, the Spanish Americans revolted to protect it. 1 O. Carlos Stoetzer, The Scholastic Roots of the Spanish American Revolution, New York: Fordham UP, 1979, Print, 259 2 Stoetzer, 24 3 Ibid., 63 4 Ibid., 65 5 Stoetzer 61,62 6 Ibid., 121 7 Ibid., 156 8 Jaime E. Rodríguez, The Independence of Spanish America. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 1998, Print, 37 9 Ibid., 38 10 Ibid., 39 11 Ibid., 48 12 Ibid., 52 13 Richard Graham, Independence in Latin America, New York: Knopf, 1972, Print, 23 14 Ibid., 24 15 William Bristow, "Enlightenment," Stanford University, Stanford University, 20 Aug. 2010. Web. 01 Dec. 2013. 16 Rodríguez, 38 17 Miguel Artola, La España de Fernando VII, (Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, 1968), 68. 18 Rodriguez, 61
13 19 Camilo Torres, Memorial de agravios, in Romero and Romero, Pensamiento politico de la emancipación, I;34-5 20 Ibid., 42 21 Rodríguez, 101 22 "REPLYOF A SOUTH AMERICAN TO A GENTLEMAN OF THIS ISLAND [JAMAICA]." Bolivar s Dreams for Latin America. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Dec. 2013. 23 "Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen, 26 August 1789." Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen, 26 August 1789. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Dec. 2013. BIBLIOGRAPHY Camilo Torres, Memorial de agravios, in Romero and Romero, Pensamiento politico de la emancipación, I;34-5 "Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen, 26 August 1789." Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen, 26 August 1789. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Dec. 2013. Graham, Richard. Independence in Latin America. New York: Knopf, 1972. Print. The Independence of Spanish America. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge UP, 1998. Print. "REPLYOF A SOUTH AMERICAN TO A GENTLEMAN OF THIS ISLAND [JAMAICA]." Bolivar s Dreams for Latin America. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Dec. 2013. Stoetzer, O. Carlos. The Scholastic Roots of the Spanish American Revolution. New York: Fordham UP, 1979. Print. William Bristow, "Enlightenment," Stanford University, Stanford University, 20 Aug. 2010. Web. 01 Dec. 2013.