| Content from Wikipedia under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license ⇔ Maps from OpenStreetMap under the ODbL license |
Hispanic American Wars of Independence
The Hispanic American Wars of Independence were a series of armed conflicts that took place in the early 19th century, between 1809 and 1829, which affected the entire Spanish Empire[10] and in which the side in favor of maintaining the integrity of the Spanish Monarchy,[11] which was defeated and would later be known as "royalist" or "viceregal", fought against the side in favor of the independence or secession of new American states, which triumphed and was later called "revolutionary" or "patriot". Although the term patriot was initially used by the supporters of the Spanish King, it was later appropriated by the pro-independence side, which completely changed its meaning.[12] These conflicts are also considered civil wars[13][14][15][20] and a combination of various conflicts, both local and global.[9][21][22][23]
In 1808, the French Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte, in the course of his Continental Blockade strategy against the United Kingdom, seized the Spanish monarchs, obtained the rights to the Spanish Crown in the Abdications of Bayonne (France), and imposed the Bayonne Statute and his brother Joseph I as King of Spain. These events, which ended the Old Regime, were considered illegitimate by European and American Spaniards and led to a power vacuum. The War of the Spanish Succession in the 18th century had reduced the Spanish Empire to a second-rank global power, passing from the Habsburg dynasty to the Bourbons, although it maintained its integrity. The abdication of the Bourbons in favor of the Bonaparte dynasty also sought to preserve the integrity of the empire; however, Napoleonic Spain was finally defeated in the Napoleonic Invasion of Spain.
The liberal revolution in America and in Spain against Bonaparte, supported by the British Empire, also led to a confrontation of continental scope between the new sovereign subjects, the Cortes of Cádiz and the American Juntas. Napoleon was defeated in Europe and in 1814 signed the Treaty of Valençay with Ferdinand VII, by which the latter recovered his former right to the throne of Spain, restored absolutism and repressed the Spanish liberals, but failed to defeat the American revolutionaries, who received British support. In 1820, the liberal pronunciamiento of Riego in Cádiz against the absolute throne ended the military support of the metropolis, and Spanish resistance in America collapsed. The American revolutionaries achieved their main military victories, consolidated their independence and obtained recognition from the Portuguese Empire, the United Kingdom and the United States. In 1836, a decade after the fall of the last strongholds, Spain renounced its claims and from then on agreed to successive peace treaties with the new independent states.
Introduction
The power vacuum generated by the Napoleonic invasion of the Iberian Peninsula gave rise to a series of anti-French uprisings in Spain and in the American territories, which subsequently evolved into revolutionary processes of a liberal character. The Spanish liberal revolution and the liberal movements of Hispanic America began in varied political forms, according to the conditions prevailing in each region, but all converged on popular sovereignty and the liberal state.[25] One historiographical current holds that these liberal revolutions had as antecedents the independence of the Thirteen British Colonies in 1776, the French Revolution and the Haitian Revolution, framing them within the so-called Atlantic Revolutions.
| Centralist | Pluralist | |
|---|---|---|
| Monarchism | Kingdom of Spain and the Indies Bonaparte (Afrancesados) Bourbons |
Kingdoms with autonomy Habsburgs Governing Juntas in general |
| Liberalism | Kingdom of the Spains Deputies of the Cortes of Cádiz |
Independent republics Deputies of the American Congresses Liberal proclamations in America |
Between 1808 and 1810, many governing juntas were installed, which exercised sovereignty in the name of Ferdinand VII, the successor according to Spanish law, both in the Iberian Peninsula and in the American territories. The resistance of the American juntas to submit to the governments formed in Spain radicalized political positions even further. The establishment by the Cortes of Cádiz of a unitary empire under peninsular hegemony in both hemispheres, as in the Bayonne Statute, was a breaking point with the American Juntas, which demanded self-government; they were then declared in rebellion, the armed conflict between the Spanish government and the Americans began, and the first declarations of independence appeared.
After the French defeat in Spain, through the Treaty of Valençay Napoleon recognized Ferdinand VII as King of Spain, and the latter, now as effective King, rejected the Spanish Constitution of 1812, considering it a republican constitution,[27] contrary to the Old Regime. The Spanish Cortes, like the American Juntas, defended the rights of Ferdinand VII, but as a King subordinate to them. The King saw his sovereignty handed over or shared. They did not recognize any superior power in Ferdinand; they considered him little more than an official stripped of sovereignty. However, the restoration of Ferdinand VII in the Iberian Peninsula did not mean a return to the Old Regime either, but rather to a new form of power, more radicalized toward a personal tyranny: Absolutism. In Spain, through a coup d'état, the Manifesto of the Persians, Ferdinand declared these decrees "null and of no effect"; every trace of liberalism was erased, the Spanish liberals were persecuted and exiled, while the afrancesados, Bonapartists favorable to the established power, returned. In America, by contrast, the armed resistance of the juntas made possible new declarations of independence through their constituent congresses and the creation of republican states now completely separated from the Spanish Empire. The military conflict gave way to the appearance of the figure of the liberators, among whom stood out Hidalgo and Morelos in Mexico, José de San Martín in Argentina, Chile and Peru, José Artigas in the Banda Oriental, and Simón Bolívar in Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, Panama and Bolivia.
The independence of the new states of America was consolidated in the 1820s owing to the political and military consequences of Riego's pronunciamiento, which in Spain gave way to the Trienio Liberal, in Mexico led to the creation of the Army of the Three Guarantees in 1821, and in South America to the beginning of the end of the last viceregal army at the Battle of Ayacucho in 1824, an event usually cited as the end of the great campaigns of the wars of independence in South America.[28][29][30] The strict period of military struggle, however, spans from the Battle of Chacaltaya (1809)[31] or the Combat of Cotagaita (1810), in present-day Bolivia, to the Battle of Tampico (1829), in Mexico.[32]
The last Spanish strongholds were the San Felipe Castle in Puerto Cabello, until 1823, and San Juan de Ulúa, Veracruz, until 1825. Finally, in January 1826, the Spanish redoubts of Callao and Chiloé fell. Only the islands of Cuba and Puerto Rico remained as the last Spanish dominions, holding out as bases for the reconquest after the frustrated Colombian-Mexican plans for a joint expedition for the liberation of Cuba (1820–1827).[33] The last chapter of the war ended with Spain's attempted reconquest of its former Mexican possessions in 1829, when the expedition of Isidro Barradas reached Tampico and was defeated by the Mexican Army. However, the independent governments had to face royalist guerrillas, for example between 1823 and 1827 in Venezuela; between 1822 and 1826 in Pasto, Colombia; until 1832 in southern Chile, supported by the Mapuche and Pehuenches; and, until the 1830s, the Iquicha guerrilla in Peru. The American independences had as a direct consequence the forced emigration of the Spanish civilian population suffered during the war, and subsequently persecution and expulsion owing to the laws for the Expulsion of the Spaniards from America of the new states, with the aim of consolidating their independence.[34][35]
International recognition of the independences came first from the United Kingdom of Portugal and Brazil. Then the United States, the United Kingdom and France established commercial relations with the new American governments and subsequently recognized the sovereignty of the new states over the course of the 1820s. Spain, however, only abandoned its plans of reconquest after the death of King Ferdinand VII in 1833. The Spanish Cortes renounced their possessions in America in 1836 and authorized the government to conclude peace and recognition treaties with all the new states that had arisen on the continent.[36][37][38][39]
Antecedents of the independence process
Many years before the beginning of the conflict in 1808, antecedents of the pro-independence process in Hispanic America can be identified. Some of these occurred in Spanish America, others in the Spanish metropolis, and the last group were international, of recognized worldwide influence, such as the independence of the United States of America (1776) and the French Revolution (1789). These phenomena form part of the so-called Atlantic Revolutions.
In peninsular Spain
At the end of the 18th century, thanks to its vast empire, Spain still ranked among the great international powers. The empire not only provided prestige and diplomatic weight; it was also crucial to the economy of the Spanish Crown. At the end of the Old Regime, the revenues of the Royal Treasury coming from America represented 20% of the total fiscal revenues of the metropolis.[40] The Mexican viceroyalty contributed 80% of the American tax collection.[41] In the last third of the century, traffic with the overseas territories represented nearly half of Spanish foreign trade. It absorbed almost half of the exports, made up of Spanish products but also of European goods, since Spain, as metropolis, exercised the monopoly of trade, and all countries that wished to trade with the Indies had to do so through Spanish ports. The American territories also offered a constant supply of precious metals: between 1784 and 1796 the silver mines of Mexico and Upper Peru produced an annual average of 355 million pesos.
Sustaining the empire, however, was not easy. If preserving the commercial monopoly and eliminating contraband in times of peace was already complicated in itself, it became more so from the end of the 18th century, when Spain's alliance with France forced it to maintain a practically permanent state of war with Great Britain. The Anglo-Spanish conflicts hampered Spanish trade with America, to the point of interrupting it almost completely: by 1801 the annual average of exports to the Indies had fallen by 93%; imports also fell drastically. After the destruction of the Spanish fleet at the Battle of Trafalgar in 1805, Great Britain even ventured a direct attack on the American coasts. In 1806 and 1807 the British navy tried to occupy the port of Buenos Aires, and the viceregal authorities repulsed the attack. This action revealed Spain's powerlessness to defend its overseas kingdoms and showed the criollos (descendants of Spaniards born in America) their own strength, which they had in the development and triumph against the English pretensions.
On several occasions at the end of the 18th century and the beginning of the 19th, the Spanish Crown considered the possibility of creating independent kingdoms in the American territories. According to these plans, the viceroyalties would come to be governed by members of the royal family, becoming hereditary monarchies. The dramatic events of Spain's European politics at the end of the reign of Charles IV in 1808 led to the definitive abandonment of these plans.[42]
In Hispanic America
- The first notions of political independence would begin to arise in the Great Rebellion of the Encomenderos, in which the encomenderos opposed the interference of the Crown of Castile and the Council of the Indies in making administrative changes to the Seigneurial system of the Kingdoms of the Indies, with the aim of extending the institutions of the metropolitan government (the Spanish Monarchy) in the Indies to ensure respect for Indies law and the Laws of the Indies. This would harm the lifelong and hereditary political offices that the Spanish conquistadors had obtained (who up to that point had carried out the conquest on their own initiative and with only a nominal participation of the Spanish state, which mostly gave them the diplomatic protection of Vassalage, having managed to make themselves feudal sovereigns in America). In response, independence projects would arise among the supporters of Martín Cortés Zúñiga[43] or Gonzalo Pizarro[44] (such as Francisco de Carvajal) to prevent the abolition of the encomiendas. Thus, the party of the encomenderos and the party of the King could have been analogous to the later struggle between separatists and royalists (above all in its aspect of class struggle on the part of the landowning criollo oligarchy in rebellion against the King).[45]
- From earlier decades there had been revolutions of the most diverse characteristics and aims, which did not, however, form part of the Hispanic American independence movement. Among them stood out the rebellion of Túpac Amaru I in Peru (1570), that of Guillén de Lampart in Mexico (1640–1643), the Revolutions of the Comuneros in Paraguay (1721–1735), that of the Canarian Juan Francisco de León against the monopoly of the Royal Guipuzcoan Company in Venezuela (1748), the Maya uprising led by Jacinto Canek in Yucatán, Mexico (1761), and the Quechua-Aymara uprising led by Túpac Amaru II in Cusco, Peru (1780–1781). The Revolution of the Comuneros in El Socorro (present-day Santander (Colombia)), in addition to the Arauco War, in which the Mapuche people had halted the Spanish advance for more than two centuries, or the multiple protests and rebellions of the 18th century in the Viceroyalty of Peru against Spanish absolutism. However, not all of these rebellions would have been separatist in character, since the great majority bore the slogan Long live the King, death to bad government and mostly sought to demand reforms within the institutional framework of the Crown in order to fulfill the Pactism between American subjects and the monarchy.
- The liberal ideas of the Enlightenment, which were spread in America and throughout Europe and reached the universities, literary academies and economic societies, fostered revolutionary ideals that were contrary to the conduct of the Spanish Monarchy in its Empire. Among these new ideas stood out the principle of national sovereignty, the social contract of Rousseau, and individual rights, opposed to royal absolutism. Taking up these ideas, the Peruvian Juan Pablo Vizcardo y Guzmán published in 1791 his Letter to the Spanish Americans, a document in which he exhorts the peoples of America to obtain their independence.
- The meetings abroad of the foremost Hispanic American leaders of the revolution and the participation of some of them in the European liberal revolutions, as well as their contacts with foreign governments.
International
- The United States Declaration of Independence, made in 1776 by Great Britain's thirteen American colonies, began the processes of independence from European colonialism;
- The Virginia Declaration of Rights of 1776, the first to proclaim that all men are by nature free and independent and have a series of inherent rights of which they cannot be deprived.
- The French Revolution in 1789, which proclaimed the equality of all Frenchmen and their fundamental rights, although it excluded the slaves of its colonies.
- The Haitian Revolution of 1791, carried out by the black slaves of that French colony, the first to abolish slavery and the first to achieve independence from colonialism in Latin America and the Caribbean, taking advantage of the fact that Napoleon would not prevent independence, being involved in his wars throughout Europe.
- The defeat of the Spanish fleet at the Battle of Trafalgar in 1805 at the hands of the British Empire.
- The failed attempts of the British Empire to directly occupy new continental American territories, such as the one it had undertaken against Cuba and Cartagena de Indias in the War of the Asiento (1741), or the two English invasions of the Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata in 1806 and 1807, which led to the generation of a Hispanic American awareness of its own capabilities and powers and to the creation of several local military corps such as the Regiment of Patricians.
- The failed attempt to invade and liberate Venezuela in 1806 by a naval expedition organized in the United States, led by General Francisco de Miranda.
Crisis of the Spanish monarchy and transformation of the throne (1808–1833)
The independence process in Hispanic America was immersed in the global context of the Napoleonic Wars. It broke out in 1808 with the cession of the Spanish throne to Napoleon Bonaparte in the Abdications of Bayonne; he designated his brother Joseph Bonaparte as constitutional King of Spain, according to the Bayonne Constitution. This provoked the rejection of the entire Spanish monarchy, and the phenomenon of the patriotic Juntas arose, which proclaimed Ferdinand VII as King. But there was a conflict between the American junta movements and the Spanish ones, which proposed in the Constitution of Cádiz a unitary monarchy under peninsular hegemony. The defeat of Napoleon, and his need to recover his armies from Spain, led to the agreement with Ferdinand VII in the Treaty of Valençay. Ferdinand agreed to peace and recovered the throne, according to Spanish law, with full absolutist powers. The restored Ferdinand rejected the Cortes of Cádiz and repressed the Spanish liberals, but could not defeat the revolutionaries of America.
| Name | Start | End | Body | Processes | Monarch |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kingdom of Spain and the Indies (Royaume d'Espagne et des Indes) (Old Regime) | 1808 | 1814 | Napoleonic Spain; Supreme Governing Junta (1808) | French military occupation; Abdications of Bayonne; Bayonne Constitution | Joseph Bonaparte (French military occupation until 1813) |
| Kingdom of Spain and the Indies or of the Spains (Liberalism) | 1808 | 1814 | Supreme Central Junta; Regency and Cortes of Cádiz | Apodaca–Canning Treaty; Spain during the Napoleonic Invasion; Napoleonic Invasion of Spain; Spanish Constitution of 1812 | Ferdinand VII (Prisoner at Valençay) |
| Kingdom of Spain and the Indies (Old Regime) | 1814 | 1819 | Absolutist Sexennium | Treaty of Valençay; Coup d'état of May 1814 | Ferdinand VII |
| Kingdom of Spain and the Indies or of the Spains (Liberalism) | 1820 | 1822 | Trienio Liberal | Riego's pronunciamiento | Ferdinand VII (Subordinate) |
| Kingdom of Spain and the Indies (Old Regime) | 1823 | 1833 | Absolutist Decade | Hundred Thousand Sons of Saint Louis; Royalist War | Ferdinand VII (French military occupation until 1827) |
In Spain
- The situation of the government of Spain, immersed in the Napoleonic Wars. Although at first it was allied with France through the Treaty of San Ildefonso (1796), it later opposed Napoleon, who sought to impose a kindred liberal monarchy. The fall of the Spanish Old Regime with the Abdications of Bayonne implied that the Castilian kingdoms of the Indies would lose the special status granted to them by the Laws of the Indies, according to which they were patrimony of the Spanish monarchy (although previously, in 1768, in practice, the American kingdoms had been reduced to a colonial condition by the Bourbon Reforms of the Spanish Empire). Now, in the new regime of liberal character, both in the provisions of the Statute of Bayonne (1808)[2] and likewise in the Spanish Constitution (1812)[3], the Europeans sought to diminish or eliminate the representation or the number of American representatives in parliament.
- The government vacuum in Spain, caused successively by the war with Napoleon and by the Trienio Liberal brought about by the revolution of Spanish constitutionalism, opened the opportunity for the Hispanic American ruling class, formed by European criollos, to give impetus to and sustain the movement and the war for independence as a definitive means of preserving and improving their status, diminished or at risk of being lost through liberalism. The independence of the Homeland was the essential character of the movement that finally prevailed everywhere in America, above other pro-independence movements which, like Hidalgo's failed one in Mexico, also sought to be accompanied by a true social revolution. In some countries, the result was a continuity of the practices of colonial castes, in which slaves, indigenous people and criollos did not exercise the same rights.
In Hispanic America
- The discontent of the American population, among the criollos, who wanted independence in order to change a colonial system that they considered unjust because it excluded them from the highest political decisions. The criollos wanted to direct political power and practice free trade or the free market, being able to carry out their commercial activities freely. Such freedoms in trade were held back by the monopoly exercised from the metropolis, added to gabelles and obstacles. They insisted on taking control of the cabildos and the administration of the colonies.
- The concept of Indies law, according to which Hispanic America was a royal possession belonging to the Spanish Crown as patrimony of the royal family, meant that when King Ferdinand VII, together with his father Charles IV, were held in France, the American provinces did not recognize the Cortes of Cádiz or the Supreme Central Junta, but instead formed Governing Juntas in each country, with the initial aim of governing and later of replacing the Spanish state.
- A part of the criollo aristocracy did not agree with some fundamental aspects of the Spanish Constitution of 1812, such as the distribution of land or political equality between themselves and the Indians. This motive was decisive only in Mexico, so that, when the Spanish constitution came into force again in 1820, these criollos, led by Agustín de Iturbide, changed sides and went from defending the unity of the Spanish Monarchy to fighting for independence.
International
- The United Kingdom attained the position of world hegemonic power in international maritime traffic, at the expense of the Spanish American dominions. England gave support in its territory to the formation of the Masonic lodges that supported the independence of America and to their chiefs, who later ended up being the leaders of the independence of America, such as Simón Bolívar and José de San Martín. England aided the logistics of the pro-independence troops and the naval movement of their troops, for example to Venezuela, in a limited way during the Napoleonic Wars and more openly afterward, as well as the transport and arming of pro-independence troops from Europe and England, such as the more than 5,000 Polish riflemen.
- France invaded the Iberian Peninsula during the Napoleonic occupation (1808–1813) and during the support of the European Holy Alliance in favor of King Ferdinand VII (1823–1827) to recover the throne of Spain. With respect to America, the Bourbon restoration in France led to an agreement with Great Britain, reflected in the Polignac Memorandum, by which they would not support the Spanish restoration in the American kingdoms.
The formation of the Hispanic American states
Beginning: the autonomous Hispanic American juntas

In Europe, the occupation of Spain by Napoleonic France took a turn after the Mutiny of Aranjuez, in which the then Prince of Asturias overthrew the government of the Prince of the Peace, Manuel Godoy, followed by the abdication of Charles IV in his favor, establishing himself as Ferdinand VII. However, as soon as he could, Charles IV protested his abdication and made this known to Napoleon. The Emperor therefore took advantage of this situation for his own benefit. First he postponed the recognition of Ferdinand VII until he could meet with him, making him travel to French territory at Bayonne. There he brought Charles IV, whom he recognized at all times as still king, and with whom he agreed, through Godoy, on his abdication of the crown in exchange for maintaining the integrity of the Spanish Crown and its American possessions, which he accepted. Finally, together they convinced Ferdinand VII to be a good and loyal son and return the crown to his father, which Ferdinand VII ended up accepting without knowing of the pact made the day before. Napoleon, now holder of the succession rights over all the kingdoms of the monarchy, extracted renunciations of their rights from the Prince of Asturias and from the infantes who were heirs of Charles IV, offering a million-strong pension to the now Spanish royal family on French soil, although in reality the whole family remained captive of the Emperor. Napoleon began to govern Spain directly and organized the creation of the Constitutional Act of Spain, drafted right there in Bayonne, and a month after the abdications he appointed his elder brother Joseph I Bonaparte, at that time King of Naples, as the new king of the Spains and of the Indies. Joseph Bonaparte of course accepted the Spanish Crown, renouncing the Neapolitan one, swore the new Bayonne constitution and entered Madrid as a King protested against by the traditional Spanish institutions, which accepted the Abdications of Bayonne de facto.
However, the Spanish people did not agree with the French invasion, and little by little the uprisings began that pitted the insurgent half of Spain against the other, Josephine Spanish half, propped up by the occupation forces of the French Empire, in the so-called Napoleonic Invasion of Spain (1808–1814). The Spanish insurgents organized themselves into governing juntas in the different constituent parts of the Spanish Crown, mainly in the southern part of the peninsula. In America, as the news arrived from Europe, American governing juntas were formed, likewise to preserve the dynastic rights of King Ferdinand VII, thenceforth called the Desired. But the American juntas faced a dilemma: should they be autonomous like their peninsular sisters, or should they depend on some European junta; and, in the case of depending on a peninsular one, the question would be which of them all.
The peninsular Spaniards settled at some point in America did not conceive under any circumstances that the juntas should be autonomous, but the American Spaniards, better known as criollos and mestizos, saw the opportunity to break with centuries-old prohibitions and in some way attain the government of their own homelands, whether these autonomies were or were not a consequence of Napoleon's occupation. In this way, a series of local movements began in America that disregarded the appointments made by the peninsular juntas for the American government, invoking the same principles as those juntas: that they did everything in defense of the legitimate King Ferdinand VII and to stop the usurpation of the Spanish throne by Joseph I. Another argument the criollos and mestizos had was that nothing guaranteed that the European juntas would not fall into the hands of Joseph I or of Napoleon himself, and that Spanish America would consequently become a French America; in this way autonomy gave more breathing room to the Spanish royal family, opening the possibility that they might escape from their prison and do the same as the royal family of Portugal: flee to America and reign from these, their other lands.
In the midst of this whole panorama, in 1808 the ayuntamiento of Mexico City set itself up as the first autonomous American junta, even with the support of the viceroy of New Spain, José de Iturrigaray; however, the movement of peninsular Spaniards, frightened by the independence of the viceroyalty, organized a coup d'état, deposing Iturrigaray and imprisoning all the rebels.
| Year | Day | Name | Location | Present-day country | Leaders |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1808 | August 9 | Junta of Mexico | Viceroyalty of New Spain | Francisco Primo de Verdad Melchor de Talamantes José de Iturrigaray | |
| 1808 | September 21 | Junta of Montevideo | Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata | Francisco Javier de Elío | |
| 1809 | May 25 | Governing Audiencia | Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata | Bernardo de Monteagudo Jaime de Zudáñez | |
| 1809 | July 16 | Junta Tuitiva in La Paz | Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata | Pedro Murillo | |
| 1809 | August 10 | First Junta of Quito | Viceroyalty of New Granada | Juan Pío Montúfar | |
| 1810 | April 19 | Supreme Junta of Caracas | Captaincy General of Venezuela | Francisco de Miranda Martín Tovar Ponte José de las Llamozas Juan Germán Roscio | |
| 1810 | May 22 | Supreme Provincial Governing Junta of Cartagena[n 3] | New Kingdom of Granada | José María García de Toledo | |
| 1810 | May 25 | First Junta of Buenos Aires | Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata | Cornelio Saavedra Mariano Moreno Manuel Belgrano | |
| 1810 | July 3 | Extraordinary Junta of Santiago de Cali[46] | New Kingdom of Granada | Joaquín de Caycedo y Cuero | |
| 1810 | July 20 | Junta of Santa Fe | New Kingdom of Granada | Francisco José de Caldas Camilo Torres | |
| 1810 | September 16 | Cry of Dolores | Viceroyalty of New Spain | Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla | |
| 1810 | September 18 | First Government Junta of Chile | Captaincy General of Chile | Mateo de Toro Zambrano Juan Martínez de Rozas | |
| 1810 | September 22 | Second Junta of Quito | Viceroyalty of New Granada | Carlos de Montúfar José de Cuero y Caicedo | |
| 1811 | February 28 | Cry of Asencio | Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata | Pedro José Viera Venancio Benavides | |
| 1811 | May 15 | Junta of Paraguay | Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata | Pedro Juan Caballero Fulgencio Yegros Gaspar Rodríguez de Francia | |
| 1811 | June 20 | Tacna Insurrection | Viceroyalty of Peru | Francisco Antonio de Zela | |
| 1811 | August 19 | Supreme National American Junta or Supreme Governing Junta of America |
Viceroyalty of New Spain | Ignacio López Rayón José María Liceaga José Sixto Verduzco José María Morelos | |
| 1811 | November 5 | First Cry of Independence of Central America | Captaincy General of Guatemala, Viceroyalty of New Spain | Manuel José Arce Leandro Fagoaga José Matías Delgado | |
| 1814 | August 3 | Cuzco Rebellion | Viceroyalty of Peru | José Angulo Mateo Pumacahua |
The Junta of Seville named itself Supreme Junta of Spain and the Indies with the clear aspiration of controlling all of Spain's overseas possessions, since it was the seat of the former Casa de Contratación of Seville and therefore the traditional gateway of entry and exit for all communication between the peninsula and the Indies. For this reason some American governments did not hesitate to grant it recognition. But the other juntas knew that they could not win the war disunited, so they strove to merge all of them into the Supreme Central and Governing Junta of the Kingdom, organized in Aranjuez on September 25, 1808, so that the Americans would no longer have doubts about whom they should obey.
However, the reason the American juntas continued to be formed despite the centralization of the peninsular juntas into a single one was that the relationship of the former viceroyalties and captaincies general was not with a junta or any peninsular body, but directly with King Ferdinand VII; so as long as he was not free, they had no reason to obey any self-proclaimed authority in the peninsula. To win over the Americans, the Central Junta agreed that, just as the traditional kingdoms of the peninsula would send two representatives for its functioning, the overseas kingdoms could send their own representative. This would be the first time that any overseas possession had representation in any body in the peninsula. However, with the dynastic crisis as it was, the measure came far too late. The "kingdoms" that could send representation were the viceroyalties of New Spain, Peru, New Granada and Buenos Aires, as well as the independent captaincies general of Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guatemala, Chile, Venezuela and the Philippines.
This plan was criticized for offering unequal and scant representation to the overseas territories; nevertheless, at the end of 1808 and the beginning of 1809 the provincial capitals elected the candidates, whose names were sent to the capitals of the viceroyalties or captaincies general. Several important large cities were left without any direct representation in the Supreme Junta. In particular Quito and Chuquisaca (La Plata or Sucre), which saw themselves as capitals of their provinces, resented being subsumed within the larger "Vice-kingdoms". This unease led to the creation of juntas in these cities in 1809, which were finally violently repressed by the authorities during the course of the year. In order to establish a government with greater legitimacy, the Supreme Junta called for the holding of "Extraordinary and General Cortes of the Spanish nation". The scheme for the elections to the Cortes, now on the basis of provinces (provincial deputations) and not of kingdoms, was more equitable and proportionate, but it did not fulfill American expectations, which awaited a redefinition of what were considered the Spanish provinces in America based on the former overseas intendancies.
Owing to the setbacks suffered by the Spanish forces against Napoleon, the Supreme Junta left Aranjuez and the region of La Mancha to take refuge in Seville and finally on the island-city of Cádiz, where it would function as the Council of Regency of Spain and the Indies from January 29, 1810, always in the name of Ferdinand VII. By this time, most Americans saw no reason to recognize a provisional government that was under the threat of being captured by the French at any moment, so they began working on the creation of local American juntas to preserve the region's independence from the French. The junta movements succeeded in New Granada (Colombia), Venezuela, Chile and the Río de la Plata (Argentina), but not in Central America. Ultimately, Central America, together with most of New Spain, Quito (Ecuador), Peru, Charcas (Bolivia), the Caribbean and the Philippine Islands, remained under royalist control during the following decade and participated in the Spanish effort to establish a liberal government represented by the Cortes of the Spanish monarchy.
Radicalization: constituent congresses and declarations of independence
In 1810 the Sevillian Central Junta was dissolved; after the Napoleonic victories and the almost complete loss of peninsular territory, it was succeeded by the Regency of Cádiz, which in turn served as a preamble to the establishment of the Spanish Constitution of 1812. As a result, from Cádiz (the last independent Spanish redoubt), the aim was to put an end to the absolutist state of the whole monarchy and consequently to establish a liberal regime in Europe and America, but one which ultimately sought to subject Ferdinand VII and the American dominions, which were granted minority representation, to the European dictate of the national laws of the Iberian Peninsula.
In America, the conflict became radicalized and the American self-government juntas, which had previously recognized the person of the Spanish Monarch, were transformed into the respective national congresses of each nascent state, which then made their declarations of independence. These events took place in an atmosphere of growing violence and military conflicts that spread across the continent. The declarations of independence of the new American countries are:
| Name | Viceroyalty or emancipated territory | Year | Date | Declaration | Constituent Congress | Present-day country |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| American Confederation of Venezuela | Captaincy General of Venezuela | 1811 | July 5 | Act of the Declaration of Independence of Venezuela | First National Congress of Venezuela | |
| Free State of Cartagena | United Provinces of New Granada | 1811 | September 11 | Act of Independence of the Province of Cartagena | ||
| State of Quito | Real Audiencia of Quito of the Viceroyalty of New Granada |
1811 | October 11 | Constitution of Quito | Constituent Congress of the State of Quito | |
| United Provinces of the Río de la Plata | Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata | 1813 | January 31 | Assembly of the Year XIII | ||
| Government of the Guarani Missions of the Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata |
1813 | October 12 | First Paraguayan constitution | Congress of 1813 | ||
| Northern America | Viceroyalty of New Spain | 1813 | November 6 | Act of Independence of Northern America | Congress of Anáhuac (Chilpancingo, Sep. 13, 1813) | |
| Federal League | Governorate of Montevideo of the Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata |
1815 | June 29 | Congress of Oriente | ||
| Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata | 1816 | July 9 | Argentine Declaration of Independence | Congress of Tucumán | ||
| State of Chile | Captaincy General of Chile | 1818 | February 12 | Act of Independence of Chile | [n 4] | |
| Gran Colombia | Viceroyalty of New Granada | 1819 | December 17 | Congress of Angostura | ||
| Free Province of Guayaquil | Government of Guayaquil of the Viceroyalty of Peru |
1820 | October 9 | Independence of Guayaquil | ||
| Republic of Peru | Viceroyalty of Peru | 1821 | July 28 | Act of Independence of Peru | Constituent Congress of Peru (1822) | |
| Central America | Captaincy General of Guatemala | 1821 | September 15 | Independence of Central America[47][48] | ||
| Mexican Empire | Province of New Spain of the Viceroyalty of New Spain |
1821 | September 28 | Act of Independence of the Mexican Empire | Provisional Governing Junta | |
| Province of Panama and Province of Veraguas of the Viceroyalty of New Granada |
1821 | November 28 | Act of Independence of Panama | Independence of Panama | Panama | |
| Province of Charcas of the Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata |
1825 | August 6 | Bolivian Declaration of Independence | General Assembly of Deputies of the Provinces of Upper Peru |
Course of the conflict
Military campaigns
Military campaigns of the Hispanic American Independence (1810-1829)
| Initial period | Intermediate period | Final period | |
|
|
Participants
Royalists
In the Hispanic American wars of independence, the royalists were the side characterized by the armed forces formed mainly by Spaniards, Europeans, Americans and Indians, and employed for the defense of the Spanish Monarchy in the first third of the 19th century.[49]
The dictionaries of the Real Academia have defined them since 1803 as regiarum partium sectator, one who in civil wars follows the party of the kings. In 1822 potestatis regia defensor was added, one who defends the regalia and rights of the kings.
| New Spain, Guatemala and Cuba |
New Granada, Venezuela and Quito |
Río de la Plata and Paraguay |
Peru, Charcas and Chile |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
Pro-independence forces
During the Hispanic American wars of independence, independentistas (pro-independence fighters) was the common name by which the combatants in favor of independence from the Spanish Crown called themselves, combining feelings of liberation and of attachment to the Homeland, the native or adopted land to which they felt bound by certain values, culture, history and affections.
| Mexico |
New Granada, Venezuela, Peru, Upper Peru and Quito |
Río de la Plata, Upper Peru, Chile, Paraguay and Peru |
Uruguay |
|
|
|
Foreign participation
| Foreign participation |
|
Military invasion of Spain
Imperialist expansion in America Territorial expansion in America
Military aid to Spain
|
United States intervention
The Americans intervened by supporting and promoting the uprising of the Spanish territories of West Florida, East Florida and Texas. All this was done through expeditions of volunteers led by American generals. The Republic of West Florida was immediately annexed to the United States in 1810. The attempt in East Florida in 1812 failed and led the territory into chaos. The situation became more complex with the uprising of the Creek and Seminole Indian nations. In 1821 the United States and Spain signed the treaty of purchase and cession of the Floridas. In Texas, the rebel Gutiérrez de Lara traveled to the United States and obtained American support, forming a force of filibusters in Louisiana that would ultimately be defeated at the Battle of Medina.
The pro-independence privateers were privately armed ships recruited by the pro-independence governments during the Hispanic American wars of independence to destroy Spanish commerce and capture Spanish merchant vessels. The most important privateer port was Baltimore. They were generally fast vessels, that is, schooners or brigantines. The large-scale deployment of warships began from 1816 onward, especially under the flag of Buenos Aires and the Oriental flag of Artigas. From 1821, these privateers sailed under the flags of Mexico and Colombia. The main motivation of these pro-independence privateers was plunder, which is why they avoided fighting the Spanish Navy.
Cádiz was the main target port and the second most important port was Havana, in Cuba. The United States government turned a blind eye to the North American privateers in an attempt to force Spain to cede Florida (Adams–Onís Treaty), although after that it took effective measures to put an end to the privateers of its own country.
British stance
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland was an ally of Spain in the War of the Sixth Coalition (1812-1814) against the invasion of Napoleon Bonaparte. Defeated France signed the Treaty of Paris of 1814. Great Britain committed itself not to give military aid to the American insurgent forces and declared strict neutrality in the conflict. However, the imperialist position of the United Kingdom developed throughout the conflict a set of military, political and diplomatic aid measures from the United Kingdom or its colonies, in favor of the insurgents or revolutionaries, aimed at dismembering the Spanish dominions in America. Owing to the persistent enlistment in the insurgent forces, and in the face of Spanish diplomatic complaints, the United Kingdom issued a proclamation warning British subjects that they must not accept any commission nor lend military aid to any of the belligerents, which had no effectiveness whatsoever. In 1819 the United Kingdom enacted the Foreign Enlistment Act of 1819, prohibiting British subjects from taking part in or equipping armed forces that were at war with nations at peace with the United Kingdom, which likewise did not stop the flow of military men, weapons and ships to fight in favor of the insurgency.[50]
Territories
During the struggles between the pro-independence side and the royalists, situations of mutual violence followed one after another. The revolutionaries disowned the Spanish monarchical authorities in America, formed armies and constituted American republics. The Spanish government and Ferdinand VII reacted by denying legitimacy to the American government juntas, and under Spanish direction the royalist armies were formed in America with the help of Spanish expeditionaries, but mainly with a majority of troops and officers of American origin, which for some authors gave it the character of a civil war.[51][52]
Conflicts by territory
| New Spain and Guatemala | New Granada, Venezuela and Quito |
|
United States (North America) Mexico (North America) Captaincy General of Guatemala (Central America)
|
| Río de la Plata, Paraguay and Upper Peru | Chile and Peru |
|
Río de la Plata and Paraguay Upper Peru |

■ Government under royalist control
■ Loyal to the Supreme Central Junta or Cortes
■ American junta or insurrection movement
■ Independence declared or established
■ Spain under the liberal revolution
South America
The initial phase had as its main component the military confrontation between the great capitals of the various provinces of viceroyalties and captaincies that remained loyal to the government of Spain and others which, following the example of the juntas of Spain, created American self-government Juntas in which the natives of America took control of the government.
In this first phase, the constitutional government of Cádiz fought against the armies of the juntas. In the south, the old Viceroyalty of Peru suppressed its own pro-independence movements and sent aid to other loyal provinces of America that were still holding out against the revolutionaries, becoming the great Spanish military stronghold of the south.
These forces not only halted the advance of the arms of the Junta of Buenos Aires, the most active one, but also put an end to the juntas of Charcas, or present-day Bolivia, of Chile and of Quito, and made it possible to create other loyal armies with natives of the countries in revolution.
Later on, from 1812, European expeditionaries would arrive in dribs and drabs at various points until 1814, and finally in 1815 a large Spanish expedition led by Pablo Morillo invaded New Granada and gave support to the loyalists of Costa Firme. Both Pablo Morillo and the Viceroy José Fernando de Abascal y Sousa stood out as organizers of the defense of the Spanish Monarchy in America. Despite these peninsular reinforcements, by 1816 South America was not firmly secured in the hands of the royalists: a multitude of guerrillas remained in Venezuela and in Lower and Upper Peru, the loyal stronghold of Montevideo had fallen, and the powerful junta of Buenos Aires was rearming its regular armies (which had been shattered in their attacks on Upper Peru) to invade Chile in 1817. Bolívar, from Haiti, returned to Venezuela, brought together all the caudillos, and resumed the offensive in the north of the continent.
Offensive from Buenos Aires
After the Junta consolidated itself in Buenos Aires, its first military actions aimed at controlling the Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata, since not all the provinces supported its actions in the same way, and some remained loyal to Spain:
Counterrevolution in Córdoba

On the very day the Primera Junta was installed, the deposed Viceroy Cisneros sent a secret message to his predecessor, Santiago de Liniers, who was in Córdoba, entrusting him with the leadership of the resistance against the Revolution.[53] Liniers and Gutiérrez de la Concha enlisted urban militias and militiamen, gathering 1,500 men and 14 cannons.[54][55]
In the city of Mendoza, Faustino Ansay led an uprising, taking the barracks and gathering more than 200 soldiers. Three days later, lacking support, he abandoned his stance and recognized the Junta. The other cities ended up submitting to the Buenos Aires junta.
Expedition to the Interior Provinces and Upper Peru (Bolivia)
The organization of the army that was to march to the interior was entrusted to the member Juan José Castelli, who gathered 1,150 men from the infantry and cavalry regiments, from both the militia troops and the veterans.[56] The artillery consisted of 4 field pieces and 2 howitzers. The force was regularly uniformed, with abundant ammunition and good weaponry and with its pay paid in advance, thanks to a loan obtained from the merchants by the member Juan Larrea.[57] In October 1810, the vanguard of the Army of the North began its march toward Upper Peru. On November 7 both forces clashed at the Battle of Suipacha. 800 royalists with 4 cannons faced 600 pro-independence troops with 2 cannons. González Balcarce lured the royalist troops by inciting them to cross the river with a feigned flight; on the south bank they were surprisingly attacked on the flank by the infantry and artillery that were hidden among the hills, while the cavalry, which was apparently fleeing, turned around to face them. The royalists fled, abandoning weapons, artillery and ammunition, and were completely routed.[58] The result of Suipacha had a strong moral effect, and on November 10 the city of Potosí deposed the Governor Francisco de Paula Sanz.[59] In Chuquisaca, an open Cabildo recognized the authority of the porteño Junta, declaring its adherence to the Viceroyalty of Peru null and void. In La Paz, the Intendant Domingo Tristán y Moscoso joined the revolution and a congress of the people unanimously accepted the authority of the Junta of Buenos Aires. All of Upper Peru was secured for the secessionists.
Paraguay
Both the territory of Paraguay and that of the Banda Oriental of the Uruguay were held by the royalists. The Junta of Buenos Aires cut Montevideo's river communications with Paraguay via the Paraná River, and the authorities of the city of Corrientes detained several vessels bound for Asunción.[60]
The Governor Bernardo de Velasco, leading Paraguayan royalist forces, made incursions into the territory of the Missions in search of weapons.[61] On October 1, a Paraguayan flotilla attacked Corrientes and recovered the seized Paraguayan ships; it continued raiding the area for several weeks, also seizing the Guard of Curupayty, which Corrientes maintained in the present-day Ñeembucú Department.[60] On September 4, the Junta appointed the member Manuel Belgrano commander of the forces that were to operate in the Banda Oriental against the royalists of Montevideo, assigning him a meager army: 250 men drawn from various porteño military corps, with 6 cannons.[62] However, when news of the attack on the Missions reached Buenos Aires, the Junta decided to divert Belgrano's small division toward Paraguay. After crossing the Paraná, the small army kept increasing its forces with volunteer troops gathered by the military Commander of Entre Ríos, José Miguel Díaz Vélez, and some 200 men of the Patricios Regiment commanded by Gregorio Perdriel. At the end of October, with its forces organized into 4 divisions[63][64] and with the Paraguayan José Machain as sergeant major, the army advanced north through the center of Entre Ríos, avoiding crossing watercourses. On November 6, a squadron with 300 royalists under the command of Juan Ángel Michelena occupied Concepción del Uruguay; the militias of that town, commanded by Diego González Balcarce, joined Belgrano's army.
On December 19 Belgrano crossed the Paraná River with the bulk of the revolutionary army and attacked the fortified position of Campichuelo, from which the royalists withdrew after a brief exchange of fire.[65] The secessionists occupied without a fight the evacuated town of Itapúa, four leagues away, but the lack of horses and the poor condition of the troops forced Belgrano to halt without being able to pursue the royalists. The local inhabitants fled from the army—which they regarded as an invader—taking with them all means of subsistence. Paraguayan territory, with its numerous rivers, marshes and tropical forests, was a terrible obstacle to the army's advance. Nevertheless, Belgrano's men continued their difficult advance and won a small victory beside the Tebicuary River. On January 19, the Battle of Paraguarí began. Despite the numerical difference—460 men against 6,000—the pro-independence forces managed to take the Paraguayan position and force its troops to withdraw, while Velasco fled toward the town of Yaguarón. But the troops of Belgrano's advance guard turned to plundering and then mistook the reinforcements sent by Belgrano for enemies, and so they broke ranks when the Paraguayans reorganized and counterattacked. Belgrano was forced to fall back along the road by which he had come, but he was not pursued.[66] At the Battle of Tacuarí, on March 9, the patriot troops were definitively defeated. Belgrano's failure led to a Paraguayan counterattack, by which the City of Corrientes was invaded and militarily occupied on April 7.[60] A month later, however, a provincial Congress was formed that overthrew Velasco and replaced him with a provisional government Junta; in it Gaspar Rodríguez de Francia, who would rule the country for almost three decades, played a decisive role. The new government proclaimed the independence of Paraguay from the government of Buenos Aires.
Uruguay
On October 9, 1810, General Gaspar de Vigodet, newly arrived from Spain, took charge of the government of Montevideo; he reinforced his military position with urban troops led by officers of the Royal Navy. He launched a series of land campaigns toward the towns of the interior of the Banda Oriental, successively forcing their authorities to recognize the authority of Montevideo. That was the beginning of the legal unification of the future Oriental Province. Shortly afterward, he sent the naval officer Juan Ángel Michelena to occupy the shores of the Uruguay River, forcing the authorities of the towns on both banks to submit to his authority, but in some sectors they met resistance from irregular bands formed by local inhabitants. After a series of skirmishes, the royalists evacuated their positions on the western bank of the Uruguay River, and the revolutionaries were left masters of the region in March 1811.[67]
The Buenos Aires Junta entrusted Lieutenant Colonel Juan Bautista Azopardo with transporting reinforcements by river for Belgrano's army in Paraguay. The royalist authorities of Montevideo dispatched to intercept him a flotilla of seven ships of superior quality and with a more experienced crew than those of their adversary, led by Jacinto Romarate. Azopardo's flotilla sailed up the Paraná until reaching, on March 2, the height of San Nicolás de los Arroyos, where the Battle of San Nicolás began, in which the patriot fleet was defeated and agreed to surrender. The Commander was taken prisoner by the royalists and taken to Spain, while the porteño government condemned him in absentia for incompetence in command.[68] With the disappearance of the small patriot naval force, the dominance of the rivers by the royalist fleet of Montevideo was confirmed, a situation that would change only three years later. In January 1811 Francisco Javier de Elío, appointed Viceroy of the Río de la Plata, arrived in Montevideo. The royalists controlled Montevideo, but in the rural areas of the Banda Oriental revolutionary ideas were silenced by force. Instead of appealing to their loyalty, the government of Montevideo required the rural population to show the property titles of the lands they occupied—generally on a precarious basis—threatening those who did not do so with eviction from them.[69]
On February 28, on the banks of the Asencio stream, Commander Pedro José Viera launched the so-called "Cry of Asencio", rising up in arms against Elío's authority. He was supported by local ranchers and gauchos who formed irregular bands, beginning a series of battles against forces loyal to the King with the Battle of Soriano, won by Miguel Estanislao Soler and Oriental militiamen on April 4, 1811. The Junta assisted the secessionists of the Banda Oriental in order to spread the revolution and try to neutralize Montevideo, the base of the Spanish fleet in the South Atlantic Ocean. Troops from Spain could arrive through that port to suppress the revolution in the old viceroyalty, so its conquest was crucial. Belgrano, who was appointed Commander of the military forces on March 7, got in touch with Captain José Gervasio Artigas, who, after deserting his post in the garrison of Colonia del Sacramento, went over to Buenos Aires to offer his services to the Junta.[70] Artigas landed on Oriental soil on April 9 at the head of some troops from Buenos Aires and was recognized as leader by the local secessionists. After some minor battles he was able to advance toward Montevideo. Elío sent a division under the orders of Captain José Posadas to meet him, but Artigas defeated him on May 18 at the Battle of Las Piedras.[71]
With the royalists reduced to the control of Montevideo and Colonia, both strongholds were placed under siege on May 21 and 26 respectively. At the beginning of June, the royalists evacuated Colonia, which was occupied by the revolutionaries, and Artigas laid siege to Montevideo with the help of the Oriental gauchos and the forces sent by Buenos Aires. Only the city walls and the cannons of the fleet anchored in the port prevented a swift fall of the city, but its situation was compromised.
The Viceroy Elío, besieged in Montevideo, saw as the only way out the help of the Portuguese troops of Brazil and requested their assistance to defeat the revolutionaries. As early as March 20, 1811, Elío had issued a proclamation to the Oriental people threatening Portuguese intervention if the insurrection continued.
Portugal had always disputed the territory of the Banda Oriental with Spain and would not let the opportunity pass: the Portuguese government had organized the Army of Observation of Diego de Souza. These forces had already made contact with the Paraguayan governor Velasco, offering him their help against Belgrano's attack.[72] Souza also had orders to have the Infanta Carlota Joaquina, wife of King John VI of Portugal and sister of Ferdinand VII, recognized as Queen of the Río de la Plata.[73][74] On July 17 an army of 3,000 Portuguese soldiers commanded by Governor Souza crossed the border. All the towns in the east of the present-day Uruguayan territory were occupied by Portuguese troops,[75][76][77] and on October 14 the Portuguese headquarters was established in Maldonado.[72]
North America
United States
The Republic of West Florida was a short-lived republic in 1810 in the westernmost region of Spanish West Florida, which after less than three months was annexed and occupied by the United States a little later in 1810, and subsequently became part of the territory of Louisiana. The Republic of East Florida was another republic declared against Spanish rule in East Florida by pro-independence elements who wished for its annexation by the United States, without success. In 1819 the Adams–Onís Treaty was drafted between Spain and the United States, by which Spain ceded all of Florida to the United States two years after its signing.
In 1811, the Spaniards crushed the revolt of San Antonio (Texas) during the revolution against the royalists in the Mexican War of Independence. The remaining rebels then turned to the United States for help. Bernardo Gutiérrez de Lara traveled to Washington, D.C. Gutiérrez obtained the support of Augustus Magee and formed a force of American filibusters in Louisiana. A green flag of the expedition represented the rebels. The Republican Army of the North was defeated in the bloodiest battle in Texas, the Battle of Medina. In this way Texas was incorporated into the Independence of Mexico, and later came the Independence of Texas and its annexation to the United States.
Mexico
The struggle began in 1810 with the Cry of Dolores in the state of Guanajuato. The cry was given by the priest Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla, organizer of the Querétaro conspiracy. Hidalgo's plan was to form an Autonomous Government Junta loyal to Ferdinand VII. The insurrection grew rapidly and came close to storming Mexico City, since the royalist army had been defeated and Hidalgo had more than 80,000 men; but he decided to go north toward Guadalajara, where he was attacked by surprise by the new royalist army of Félix María Calleja, one of the best generals in the viceroyalty. After this defeat at Guadalajara, Hidalgo and his army marched north toward the United States but were again attacked by surprise and imprisoned in Chihuahua, where Hidalgo was shot in 1811.
A year later, in 1812, a soldier and former student of Hidalgo, José María Morelos y Pavón, with a handful of men who had escaped at Guadalajara and reinforcements from the south of New Spain, organized a new pro-independence campaign and managed to defeat the recently appointed viceroy Calleja. With the victory he organized an independent congress and a constitution at Apatzingán between 1813 and 1814. But after Ferdinand VII's return to the throne, new royalist reinforcements arrived, and under the command of viceroy Calleja they defeated and shot General Morelos at the beginning of 1815. His officers then began a guerrilla war in the south of New Spain. From 1816, the new viceroy Apodaca tried to pacify the viceroyalty, and in 1818 New Spain was almost at peace. The expedition of Francisco Xavier Mina gave a hope that was soon defeated, and only one Guerrilla remained in the south of the country, that of Vicente Guerrero; this former soldier of Morelos strongly resisted the royalists for years in the southern sierra. But in 1820 the news came that Ferdinand VII had accepted the Constitution of Cádiz, which caused general discontent in the viceroyalty. One of those discontented was Agustín de Iturbide, a royalist general whose mission was to defeat Guerrero but who decided to join the movement and proclaimed the Plan of Iguala, declaring independence. At the end of 1820 everyone was supporting the Plan of Iguala, and the new superior political chief, Juan O'Donojú, accepted it. On September 27, 1821, 11 years and 12 days after the priest Hidalgo proclaimed the freedom of Mexico, Agustín de Iturbide entered Mexico City in triumph and declared the end of 300 years of Spanish viceroyalty and the beginning of the Mexican Empire with himself as Emperor, which lasted no more than a few months. After the fall of the empire, the former Spanish territories, at that time provinces, were called upon to create a republic, which gave rise to the formation of the United Mexican States.
In the Caribbean, the islands of Cuba and Puerto Rico were not ravaged by the war and continued to form an integral part of the Kingdom of Spain until 1898.
Diplomatic maneuvers in Europe
Spain
Spain, from the uprising of Riego in 1820, found itself without the military capacity to send aid to defend the last bastions in America, much less any capacity for reconquest. The last American bastions were left isolated to follow their own fate.
On April 11, 1820, under the Liberal Triennium, a Royal Cédula was decreed in which Ferdinand VII of Spain ordered the Spanish authorities to begin peace negotiations with the American rebels. In view of this, the Crown made an offer of unlimited duration, proposing that the insurgents could keep control of the territories they had already conquered militarily (as heads of provinces with general pardons) in exchange for recognizing the authority of the legitimate government of the Metropolis in Madrid (that is, restoring their vassalage to the King of Spain, but keeping their constituted states under a single head of state), which would have been analogous to the British Commonwealth had it come about.[45]
On the other hand, Francisco Antonio Zea (representative of Gran Colombia in the United Kingdom) would propose in 1820 a project for a Spanish Democratic Empire, which was named the «Plan of reconciliation and project of Hispanic Confederation». This would have been an offer of reconciliation between both governments whereby Spain would diplomatically recognize the independence of Gran Colombia, and the latter in turn would have promoted internationally a proposal for all of Hispanic America to constitute itself into Crowned Republics that would maintain ties with the Spanish Monarchy through a Hispanic Confederation that would ensure the union of the Patria Grande (that is, the Real union with the Spanish Empire would be dissolved, but a Personal union would be maintained with the King of Spain as head of state of the multiple constituted Hispanic American republics).[78] However, this proposal would not have been the initiative of Simón Bolívar (a fervent republican with anti-peninsular sentiments), who only wanted Spain's recognition of Independence, so the optimistic Zea's proposal may have been tolerated solely to gain time.[79] In the end, the proposal would be rejected by the Spanish government, since it could cause problems for the political stability of the state (through a radical legal reorganization that would not have been accepted by the Royalist Army) given the doubtful reliability of its real purposes; at the same time Ferdinand VII (who appreciated the gesture) rejected it because it went against the traditional conception of monarchy (apart from his own absolutist ambitions), and the Cortes Generales of the Liberal Triennium also rejected it, considering it unnecessary since Spanish liberalism had already been established in the government to dispel the discontent of the American criollo elites (besides believing that the proposal came from the radical liberal Exaltados).[78]
King Ferdinand VII exhausted his last hopes of obtaining help for a chimerical absolutist restoration in America with the support of the continental European monarchies, as had happened with the restoration in Spain by the French legitimist army of the Hundred Thousand Sons of Saint Louis, which remained occupying the country between 1823 and 1828. At that time the Captaincy General of Cuba was in danger from the invasion plans of the Mexican Empire, while the Viceroyalty of Peru was the objective of Gran Colombia. The kingdom of France, which sought to recover its hegemony in Europe, sought a legitimist conference in Paris at which to revive the plan of placing Spanish infantes at the head of independent American kingdoms. The United Kingdom declined to commit itself to legitimism, directing its needs toward trade and the pressure of American expansionism.
Spain's catastrophic situation after the Napoleonic invasion, together with the conflict between liberals and absolutists begun with the revolution of Cádiz, finally led the Spanish government to a deadlock of immobility in the face of the American problem. No solutions were found to the problem of the disintegration of the Spanish Empire, nor to restoring relations with Spanish America on the basis of the recognition of its independence. As a result, a traumatic and complete rupture of the Hispanic world took place.[80]
Consequences
Mortality
Compared with the United States War of Independence, where nothing similar was experienced, the loss of life and the material destruction of the conflict during the Hispanic American independence was vastly greater.[81] It has been estimated that up to eight hundred thousand Hispanic Americans died between 1808 and 1824, bearing in mind that the region had fewer than twenty million inhabitants at that time.[82]
Indeed, it was not only a war for independence (as in the American case), but circumstances arose that added greater ferocity to the struggle.[83] Among them, one should note the enormous territorial extent of the war, which covered almost the whole of Hispanic America; the policy of terror practiced by both sides; the alternation of victories and defeats between the supporters of independence and those loyal to royal authority (called pro-independence and royalists, respectively); the exile and displacement of populations; and the prolongation of the struggle over time, which produced complete ruin in many of the cities and countryside of Spanish America, the loss of capital and goods of all kinds after the paralysis of trade and productive activities, and the dedication of material and human resources to the war effort. All this within the framework of a war that lasted four times as long as the American one—whose last episode was the Battle of Yorktown (1781).
Table of general mortality in the Hispanic American revolution according to various authors[84]
| New Spain | New Granada, Venezuela and Quito | Río de la Plata, Uruguay and Paraguay | Chile and Peru |
|
Years 1810-1821:
|
|
|
Carmona: 20,000 dead in Lower Peru.[88] |
Consequences for Hispanic America

The consequences for Hispanic America were many.
The commercial monopoly disappeared and, with it, protectionism, with the consequent impoverishment of many Hispanic American regions, unable to compete with the industries of Europe, mainly the British.
In addition, at the Congress of Panama in 1826, the dream Bolívar had for America of creating a United States of South America was frustrated. However, the opinion of some Hispanic Americans is very different, since they assert that independence gave their countries the opportunity to develop according to their own needs and to apply a more equitable justice among their ethnic components.
Although no changes were sought in the territorial structure derived from uti possidetis, the pro-independence movement had a disintegrating effect that caused the fragmentation of the old viceroyalties and captaincies into several nascent countries, so that separatism continued its political process beyond emancipation itself. The loss of an internationally strong army and the onset of instability in the region (such as the constant civil wars) were exploited by foreign powers, as would be seen in the United States intervention in Mexico, which would entail the loss of more than half of Mexican territory.
The seven independent countries created at the conclusion of the Hispanic American wars of independence were:
Mexican Empire
Gran Colombia
United Provinces of the Río de la Plata
Chile
Peru
Republic of Bolívar
Paraguay

The Belgrano expedition to Paraguay would be defeated by the royalist armies, but immediately afterward a self-government junta obtained the freedom of Paraguay in 1811, which constituted itself as a state independent of Spain in 1813 and rejected its membership in the United Provinces of the Río de la Plata, although Argentina would still regard it as an integral part and would not recognize its independence until July 17, 1852.[89]
In economic matters, foreign trade policies varied among the new countries; some, such as the United Provinces of the Río de la Plata and Peru, initially applied protectionist policies, while Chile was more open to foreign trade, although applying a kind of neo-mercantilism.[90]
Defunct countries proclaimed autonomous or declared independent in the wars of emancipation
- The Mexican Empire, which momentarily included the Kingdom of Guatemala, was abolished in 1823 and gave rise to the United Mexican States. The Central American Provinces continued their process of independence, declared on September 15, 1821, with the formation of the United Provinces of Central America.
- Gran Colombia
- Venezuela –see Independence of Venezuela– the Revolution of April 19, 1810 took place, and the following year, on July 5, 1811, the Signing of the Act of the Declaration of Independence of Venezuela was carried out.
- see Independence cries (Colombia) (uprisings of Santa Fe de Bogotá on July 20, 1810 and of Cartagena de Indias on May 22; see Patria Boba).
- Panama –the Independence of Panama was proclaimed on November 28, 1821 and it subsequently joined Gran Colombia voluntarily.
- The State of Quito proclaimed its autonomy on August 10, 1809, which was promptly suppressed; it was proclaimed again on August 2, 1810, and it was incorporated into Gran Colombia after the Battle of Pichincha (May 24, 1822) —see Ecuadorian War of Independence—. Guayaquil proclaimed its independence on October 9, 1820 as the Free Province of Guayaquil.
- United Provinces of the Río de la Plata
- In 1814 the Oriental Province was created, forming part of the Provinces of the Río de la Plata
- –see especially the Primera Junta appointed on May 25, 1810, Independence of Argentina— (proclaimed on July 9, 1816; previously the Federal League proclaimed its independence on June 29, 1815 at the Congress of Oriente).
Countries that became independent outside the wars of emancipation
Uruguay formed part of the Río de la Plata. Incorporated into Portugal after the Luso-Brazilian invasion, it passed to Brazil in 1825, until its independence in 1828 as a consequence of the war of Brazil. Furthermore, after complex processes that unfolded in later years, the 16 'Hispanic American states' came into being: Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay and Venezuela. In the Caribbean, Santo Domingo (present-day Dominican Republic) remained part of Spain until November 30, 1821, while Cuba and Puerto Rico continued to do so until their separation as a result of the Spanish–American War in 1898.
- 1828 - Uruguay becomes independent from the United Provinces of the Río de la Plata and from Brazil.
- The United Provinces of Central America, composed of the provinces of the Kingdom of Guatemala that had declared their independence from Spain in 1821, was formed upon separating from the Mexican Empire and from 1824 was called the Federal Republic of Central America; it finally broke up into the following states:
- Costa Rica, first between 1829 and 1831 and definitively in 1838.
- Nicaragua in April 1838.
- Guatemala in April 1839.
- Honduras in 1839.
- El Salvador in 1839 and formally on January 31, 1841.
- The Dominican Republic became independent from Spain as the Independent State of Spanish Haiti in December 1821 and was annexed by Haiti on February 9, 1822. It later declared its independence from Haiti on February 27, 1844, annexing itself to Spain on March 18, 1861. It became independent from Spain again after the Restoration War, which ended in 1865, proclaimed with the Cry of Capotillo on August 16, 1863.
After the conclusion of the Spanish–American War and the signing of the Treaty of Paris (1898), Cuba, Puerto Rico, the Philippines and Guam came under the control of the United States.
- Cuba achieved its independence on May 20, 1902, but remained under American control under the Platt Amendment until 1934. Puerto Rico remains a Commonwealth (Estado Libre Asociado) of the United States to this day, and is therefore not an independent state.
- Panama became independent from Spain on November 28, 1821. But it decided to maintain the ties of union with Bogotá and joined Gran Colombia, a defunct country made up of present-day Colombia, Ecuador, Panama and Venezuela. Over time, that country broke up, and then the provinces that geographically occupied the central part of the disintegrated Gran Colombia, which at that time comprised the former departments of Boyacá, Cauca, Cundinamarca, Magdalena and Isthmus (Panama), decided to form a new State called the Republic of New Granada. In 1840 Panama, out of fear of a civil war that might have catastrophic consequences like those of the war of independence, temporarily separated from New Granada and called itself the State of the Isthmus, but the following year it rejoined New Granada, whose name changed constitutionally, successively, to the Granadine Confederation, the United States of Colombia and the Republic of Colombia. On November 3, 1903, the rebellion took place from the cabildo of Panama City, instigated by people who had interests in the New Canal Company (the French canal), and for almost a month negotiations or coercion took place so that the municipalities and provinces would adhere to the separatist rebellion; this separation succeeded owing to the presence of American troops and to the weakness, anarchy and chaos in which Colombia was plunged after the Thousand Days' War.
| Country | Year | Date | Declaration | Name | Country from which they became independent or separated |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua and Costa Rica | 1838-1839 - 1841 | Separation | Federal Republic of Central America | ||
| Panama | 1903 | November 3 | Separation | Provisional Government Junta | Colombia |
| Ecuador | 1830 | May 13 | First Magna Carta of Ecuador | Constituent Assembly of Riobamba | Gran Colombia |
| Uruguay | 1830 | June 28 | Preliminary Peace Convention (1828) | Oriental State of Uruguay | Cisplatina Province |
Consequences for Spain

The Hispanic American wars of independence brought about the loss of the viceroyalties and captaincies general that formed part of the Spanish Empire, which was left greatly reduced territorially and economically decimated. This meant a disaster for the Spanish Monarchy and a strengthening of the position of the United Kingdom as the most important world power.
For the merchants of Cádiz, the Spanish government administration, the nobles and, naturally, for the royal family (direct owner of these crown assets), an essential source of income disappeared—the riches and funds of the Indies—fundamental for the Royal Treasury and the Cádiz monopoly.
The humblest or poorest sector of the Spanish nation, on the other hand, showed itself somewhat indifferent to American independence and at all times regarded it as a problem in a certain way foreign to it, since America was disconnected for the vast majority of the disadvantaged sectors among the peninsular Spaniards—peasants, workers or merchants of the middle or upper classes—had no relation whatsoever to their lives, and brought them no benefit (or harm).[91]
The Barradas expedition in 1829 was Spain's last military effort on continental soil against Hispanic American independence.[92]
With the Revolution of 1830, absolutism definitively fell in France, as did King Ferdinand VII's main support in the Holy Alliance, but all the military projects of the Spanish government for the reconquest of Hispanic America came to an end in 1833 with the death of the Spanish monarch,[36][93] thus fulfilling the negative reply given by the Spanish minister Francisco Zea Bermúdez to the announcement made by the British government in 1825 through George Canning of the recognition of the new countries, when he stated that "The King will never consent to recognize the new states of Spanish America and will not cease to employ the force of arms against his rebellious subjects in that part of the World".
On the death of Ferdinand VII, the Kingdom of Spain continued its own political process, immersed in the civil wars known as the Carlist wars (1833-1876), remaining a second-rank power among the European states. Even worse, after the Glorious Revolution of 1868 that overthrew Isabella II, pro-independence wars broke out in Cuba (1868-1880) and Puerto Rico (1871), the last two Spanish territories in America. This process lasted until 1898, with the loss of the last Spanish overseas territories in the Caribbean and the Pacific to the United States.
Expulsion of the Spaniards
The expulsion of the Spaniards from America was a human tragedy at whose root lay a whole series of measures taken against them by the independent governments during the process of the Hispanic American wars of independence. It was directed at first against those in charge of the Spanish administration, and subsequently extended against the Spanish population in general, under various accusations.[94][95]
There were two predominant forms of exile: the first was a product of the circumstances of the war, and the second was forced by expulsion laws against the Spaniards on the part of the Hispanic American governments immersed in the war, and extended beyond the end of the conflict.
Peace negotiations and reconciliation: Treaties of Peace, Friendship and Recognition
After the death of the monarch Ferdinand VII of Spain in 1833, and from the reign of his daughter Isabella II, a new period began in relations between the former metropolis and the American territories. The Cortes Generales of the kingdom authorized, on December 4, 1836, the renunciation by the Spanish Crown of any territorial and sovereignty rights over the former American dominions, and the recognition of the independence of all the new American countries through the conclusion of Treaties of Peace and Friendship on the basis that "neither national honor nor national interests are compromised", which was promulgated on December 16, 1836.[96][97]
| Country | Date of signing | Entry into force | Head of State | Plenipotentiary representatives |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mexico | Dec. 28, 1836 | Nov. 14, 1837 | Mexico: President José Justo Corro Spain: Regent María Cristina de Borbón |
Mexico: Miguel Santa María Spain: José María Calatrava |
| Ecuador | Feb. 16, 1840 | Oct. 30, 1841 | Ecuador: President Juan José Flores Spain: Regent María Cristina de Borbón |
Ecuador: Pedro Gual Spain: Evaristo Pérez de Castro |
| Chile | Apr. 25, 1844 | Sep. 26, 1845[98] | Chile: President Manuel Bulnes Spain: Queen Isabella II |
Chile: José Manuel Borgoño Spain: Luis González Bravo |
| Venezuela | Mar. 30, 1845 | Apr. 22, 1846 | Venezuela: President Carlos Soublette Spain: Queen Isabella II |
Venezuela: Alejo Fortique Spain: Francisco Martínez de la Rosa |
| Bolivia | Jul. 21, 1847 | Feb. 12, 1861 | Bolivia: President José Ballivián Spain: Queen Isabella II |
Bolivia: José María Linares Spain: Joaquín Francisco Pacheco |
| Costa Rica | May 10, 1850 | Dec. 21, 1850 | Costa Rica: President Juan Rafael Mora Porras Spain: Queen Isabella II |
Costa Rica: Felipe Molina Spain: Pedro José Pidal |
| Nicaragua | Jul. 25, 1850 | Jul. 24, 1851 | Nicaragua: President Norberto Ramírez Spain: Queen Isabella II |
Nicaragua: José de Marcoleta Spain: Pedro José Pidal |
| Dominican Republic | Aug. 25, 1855 | Dominican Republic: President Pedro Santana Spain: Queen Isabella II |
Dominican Republic: Rafael María Baralt Spain: Claudio Antón de Luzuriaga | |
| Argentina | Jul. 9, 1859 | Argentine Confederation: President Justo José de Urquiza Spain: Queen Isabella II |
Argentine Confederation: Juan Bautista Alberdi Spain: Saturnino Calderón Collantes | |
| Guatemala | May 29, 1863 | Jun. 20, 1864 | Guatemala: President Rafael Carrera y Turcios Spain: Queen Isabella II |
Guatemala: Felipe del Barrio Larrazábal Spain: Manuel Pando Fernández de Pinedo |
| Argentina | Sept. 21, 1863[n 6] | Jun. 20, 1864 | Argentina: President Bartolomé Mitre Spain: Queen Isabella II |
Argentina: Mariano Severo Balcarce Spain: Manuel Pando Fernández de Pinedo |
| El Salvador | Jun. 24, 1865 | Jun. 15, 1866 | El Salvador: President Francisco Dueñas Spain: Queen Isabella II |
El Salvador: Juan Víctor Herrán Spain: Manuel Bermúdez de Castro y Díez |
| Uruguay | Jul. 19, 1870 | Oct. 9, 1882 | Uruguay: President Lorenzo Batlle Spain: Regent Francisco Serrano |
Uruguay: Adolfo Rodríguez Spain: Carlos Creus y Camps |
| Dominican Republic | Oct. 14, 1874[n 7][n 8] | Dominican Republic: President Ignacio María González Santín Spain: President Francisco Serrano |
Dominican Republic: Manuel Joaquín Delmonte Spain: Juan Gutiérrez de la Concha | |
| Peru | Aug. 14, 1879 | Nov. 15, 1879 | Peru: President Mariano Ignacio Prado Spain: King Alfonso XII |
Peru: Juan Mariano de Goyeneche y Gamio Spain: Mariano Roca de Togores |
| Paraguay | Sept. 10, 1880 | Apr. 8, 1882 | Paraguay: President Cándido Bareiro Spain: King Alfonso XII |
Paraguay: Carlos Saguier Spain: Francisco Otín y Mesía |
| Colombia | Jan. 30, 1881 | Aug. 12, 1881 | Colombia: President Rafael Núñez Spain: King Alfonso XII |
Colombia: Luis Carlos Rico Spain: Mariano Roca de Togores |
| Honduras | Nov. 17, 1894 | Aug. 28, 1895 | Honduras: President Policarpo Bonilla Spain: Regent María Cristina de Habsburgo-Lorena |
Honduras: José Diego Gámez Spain: Julio de Arellano |
| Cuba | Jun. 21, 1902[99] | Cuba: President Tomás Estrada Palma Spain: King Alfonso XIII |
[100] | |
| Panama | May 2, 1904 | Panama: President Manuel Amador Guerrero Spain: King Alfonso XIII |
[101] | |
Notes
- ↑ Installation of the Supreme Central Junta (September 25, 1808). End of all Spanish reconquest projects with the death of Ferdinand VII of Spain (September 29, 1833)
- ↑ The strict period of military campaigns runs from the Battle of Chacaltaya (October 25, 1809), in present-day Bolivia, to the Battle of Tampico (September 11, 1829) in Mexico
- ↑ On May 22, 1810, a Governing Junta was established in Cartagena owing to the imprisonment of Ferdinand VII. On June 14, 1810, the Cabildo deposed Governor Francisco Montes and deported him to Havana. On August 14, the Cabildo appointed José María García de Toledo President of the Supreme Junta of Cartagena. On November 11, 1811, Cartagena declared independence. On August 17, 1815, the Spanish troops under the command of the Pacifier Pablo Morillo laid siege to Cartagena, which fell on December 5, and its leaders were executed. For its resistance, Bolívar named Cartagena the Heroic City.
- ↑ Although in 1811 the First National Congress was convened to decide the best form of government for Chile, it was not a constituent congress, nor did it declare the country's independence. The Independence of Chile would be approved by means of a Plebiscite called by Bernardo O'Higgins in 1817.
- ↑ The treaties of peace and friendship between the Hispanic American nations and Spain are published in the Gaceta de Madrid within the BOE website [1]
- ↑ First treaty signed on July 9, 1859, but this new treaty was signed between the Kingdom of Spain and the Argentine Republic in order to reflect the situation existing after the reincorporation into the country of the province of Buenos Aires at the end of the war between the Argentine Confederation and that province (1852-1862). In addition, the principle of ius sanguinis was replaced by ius soli for the citizenship of Spanish immigrants to Argentina.
- ↑ This treaty was sanctioned again by King Alfonso XII after the restoration of the monarchy (1874).
- ↑ The Dominican Republic and the Kingdom of Spain signed an earlier treaty of peace and friendship in 1855, but the annexation of the Dominican Republic to Spain between 1861 and 1865 rendered this treaty void.
References
- ↑ By the Spains (in the plural), during the period of Spanish liberalism, is to be understood the Kingdom of Spain and the Indies, which includes peninsular Spain and the Kingdoms of the Indies or Spanish provinces in America.
- ↑ Christon I. Archer (2000). The Wars of Independence in Spanish America. Wilmington: Rowman & Littlefield, pp. 301. ISBN 978-0-8420-2469-3. In 1808 Madrid had 125,700 men permanently garrisoned from Mexico to the Río de la Plata, but most were troops originating from the overseas provinces themselves.
- ↑ Historia de la Humanidad. Editorial Larousse. Chapter: "Los inicios del siglo XIX". Page 31, 2005, Santiago de Chile.
- ↑ Div. Gen. (Ret.) Evergisto de Vergara. El Frente del Este: Rivadavia y la Guerra contra el Brasil en 1827 Archived 2011-08-29 at the Wayback Machine. Instituto de Estudios Estratégicos de Buenos Aires (IEEBA). August 2006. «En Ibero América —para la época de las Guerras por la Independencia— había menos de 50000 soldados españoles, de los cuales 20000 nunca salieron de Cuba. Luego, en el proceso de las guerras por la independencia, nunca participaron más de 30000 españoles (p. 2).»
- ↑ "Statistics of Wars, Oppressions and Atrocities of the Nineteenth Century".
- ↑ Silvio Arturo Zavala (1971). Revista de historia de América. Issues 69-70. Mexico City: Instituto Panamericano de Geografía e Historia, pp. 303. «Para el primero, de 1400000 habs. que la futura Colombia tendría en 1809 (entre ellos 78000 negros esclavos), (...) mortaldad que él mismo señala a tal guerra (unos 400 000 muertos para la Gran Colombia, entre ellos, 250 000 venezolanos).»
- ↑ François-Xavier Guerra, Las revoluciones hispánicas: independencias americanas y liberalismo español, 1995.
- ↑ Bueno, Gustavo (2004). La vuelta a la caverna. Terrorismo, guerra y globalización (in español). Barcelona: Ediciones B. p. 200.
Un sexto género de guerras podría llamarse el de las guerras mixtas, en la medida en que participan de una manera u otra en más de un género. [...] Tal sería el caso de las guerras de independencia del siglo XIX emprendidas por las provincias americanas contra el Reino de España.
- ↑ 9.0 9.1 Martín Jiménez, Luis Carlos (2020). "Esquemas para un análisis de la caída del Imperio español". El Catoblepas (in español).
- ↑ Maltby, William S. (2011). Auge y caída del imperio español (in español).
- ↑ "España no podía movilizar los recursos necesarios para mantener su posición como metrópoli de un gran imperio, y, de esta manera, mantener la integridad de la Monarquía Hispana."Manuel Chust Calero (2010). Las independencias iberoamericanas en su laberinto (in español).
- ↑ Grompone, Romeo (2017). Incertidumbres y distancias El controvertido protagonismo del estado en el Perú (in español). Instituto de Estudios Peruanos. p. 516. ISBN 9789972516634.
- ↑ 13.0 13.1 Lopez Fernández (2018). Guerras civiles, la independencia de los virreinatos de la monarquía española (in español).
- ↑ Canal, González Calleja (2012). Guerras civiles: Una clave para entender la Europa de los siglos XIX y XX (in español). pp. 26–27.
En una buena parte de América Latina, en palabras de Francois-Xavier Guerra, tuvo lugar en el siglo XIX "une guerre civile longue et destructrice". Entre la bibliografía disponible: A. Lemppériere, "Revolución, guerra civil"; MD demélas "La notion de guerre civile" "L'invention politique"; FX Guerra "Inventando la Nación"; V.Hebrard, Le Venezuela indépendant; C. Thibau Repúblicas en armas; T. Pérez Vejo, España en el debate.
- ↑ In the case of Colombia, Reyes Cárdenas (2009) reviews the historiographical approaches to the independence war in that country. Pérez Viejo (2011) says, in a videoconference, that considering them as independence processes is an approach of "liberal, positivist historiography" that hinders historical understanding. He acknowledges that the predominant approach throughout the nearly two centuries of Hispanic American independence is precisely that—"a war of independence of a series of nations that free themselves from another nation, which in this case is the Spanish one"—and proposes considering them as civil wars.
- ↑ Victor Andres Belaunde (1967). Estudios sobre el Bolívar de Madariaga (in español).
- ↑ Bernardino Bravo Lira (1986). Historia de las instituciones políticas de Chile e Hispanoamérica (in español).
- ↑ In the case of Colombia, Reyes Cárdenas (2009) reviews the historiographical approaches to the independence war in that country. Pérez Viejo (2011) says, in a videoconference, that considering them as independence processes is an approach of "liberal, positivist historiography" that hinders historical understanding. He acknowledges that the predominant approach throughout the nearly two centuries of Hispanic American independence is precisely that—"a war of independence of a series of nations that free themselves from another nation, which in this case is the Spanish one"—and proposes considering them as civil wars.
- ↑ Canal, González Calleja (2012). Guerras civiles: Una clave para entender la Europa de los siglos XIX y XX (in español). p. 26-27.
- ↑ Recent Spanish bibliography calls them Civil Wars;[13] the central thesis of Madariaga asserts that it was a War of Secession,[16][17] or else a combination of various forms of war.[18] The international historiography of the last two decades that follows the line of works on the Atlantic revolutions of liberalism considers the war of emancipation to be a civil war. "In a good part of Latin America, in the words of François-Xavier Guerra, there took place in the 19th century 'une guerre civile longue et destructrice'. The research of the last two decades has confirmed it. Among an abundant bibliography see: A. Lemppériere, “Revolución, guerra civil”; MD demélas “La notion de guerre civile” “L’invention politique”; FX Guerra “Inventando la Nación”; V.Hebrard, Le Venezuela indépendant; C. Thibau Repúblicas en armas; T. Pérez Vejo, España en el debate."[19]
- ↑ Delgado Martín, Jaime (1958). "La independencia hispanoamericana, acontecimiento internacional". Revista de estudios políticos, (in español).
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) - ↑ Sevilla Naranjo, Alexandra (2016). "Indígenas realistas en la contrarrevolución quiteña, 1809-1814". Procesos Revista Ecuatoriana de Historia (in español).
- ↑ Fernández González, José María (2023). "El siglo XIX español: guerras civiles peninsulares y ultramarinas". Posmodernia (in español). Retrieved August 23, 2025.
- ↑ Hamnett, 1995: 48; cf. Villoro, 2002.
- ↑ Therefore "it is essential that, at the outset, we do not reduce different movements to a common denominator. Different groups acted at different stages: the Caracas elite took the initiative to separate from the Spanish monarchy in 1810, but the elite of the capital of New Spain was divided in 1808 over the question of autonomy within the empire, opposed the Independence revolution in 1810, and did not act as a homogeneous group in 1821 when it joined Iturbide's movement".[24]
- ↑ Martín Jiménez, Luis Carlos (2020). "Esquemas para un análisis de la caída del Imperio español (1)". El Catoblepas (in español) (192). ISSN 1579-3974.
- ↑ La Parra, Emilio (2018). Fernando VII un rey deseado y detestado (in español). Tusquets.
- ↑ "8 claves de las independencias hispanoamericanas" (in español). La Vanguardia. January 9, 2018. Retrieved May 4, 2020.
La liberación del continente se consumó, finalmente, en 1824 con la batalla de Ayacucho, en la que el general venezolano Sucre apresó a La Serna [virrey del Perú]. Este combate es al que se suele recurrir para marcar el fin de las guerras de independencia, aunque aún continuaba la resistencia de unos cuantos focos realistas.
- ↑ "Hoy se conmemoran 191 años de la Batalla de Ayacucho" (in español). Telesurtv.net. Retrieved May 4, 2020.
La Batalla representa el fin de grandes campañas en América del Sur por la Independencia.
- ↑ "Entrevista en Guayaquil" (in español). bbc.co.uk. Retrieved May 4, 2020.
Las dos últimas batallas de la independencia americana, Junín y Ayacucho, son libradas por Bolívar, la primera, y por su lugarteniente, Antonio J. Sucre, la segunda.
- ↑ Rufino Blanco-Fombona. Fundación de la República - Biblioteca Ayacucho n.º 61 (in español). p. 67.
- ↑ Lara, María (2018). Breviario de historia de España (in español). Edaf. Quote: "el periodo estricto de lucha militar iría desde el combate de Cotagaita (1810) hasta la batalla de Tampico (1829)"
- ↑ Hernán Venegas, Delgado (2008). "Los planes colombo-mexicanos de expedición conjunta para la liberación de Cuba (1820-1827)". JSTOR, Caribbean Studies, Vol. 36, n.º 1 (in español).
- ↑ RUIZ DE GORDEJUELA URQUIJO, Jesús (2006). "La expulsión de los españoles de México y su destino incierto, 1821-1836". Universidad de Sevilla, Escuela de Estudios Hispano-Americanos (in español).
Las independencias americanas tuvieron como consecuencia directa la expulsión de sus territorios de los que hasta entonces habían sido sus actores privilegiados. La persecución y expulsión de los españoles fue el acto de represalia más directo contra población civil de los nuevos gobiernos independientes
- ↑ González Pedrero, Enrique (2017). País de un solo hombre: El México de Santa Anna (in español). Fondo de cultura económica.
la expulsión de los españoles, derivada de la necesidad de consolidar la independencia ante la conspiración de algunos de ellos que no se resignaban a perder su dominio sobre el país
- ↑ 36.0 36.1
Jaime Delgado (1960). La independencia hispanoamericana (in español). Nuevo Mundo. pp. Page 113.
No obstante, los proyectos de reconquista, oficiales o particulares, no escasearon hasta 1833, fecha de la muerte de Fernando VII
- ↑ François-Xavier Guerra (1995). Las revoluciones hispánicas: independencias americanas y liberalismo español (in español). Editorial Complutense. p. 87. ISBN 9788489365254.
Sin embargo, no fue el fracaso de la expedición de Barradas en 1829 lo que retrajo a Fernando VII de la reconquista, sino una vez más, los acontecimientos europeos -ahora la revolución de 1830- que pondrán en primer plano la situación peninsular y el colapso financiero. Sólo por ese motivo, recordará Ballesteros, el Rey dio al fin libertad a sus ministros para tratar, ya sin ningún género de restricciones, la liquidación del problema de América.
- ↑ Pedro Molas. Del absolutismo a la Constitución
- ↑ Delfina Fernández (1992). "X El Brigadier Barrada en Nueva España". Últimos reductos españoles en América (in español). Editorial Mapfre. p. 269. ISBN 9788471003119.
Pero aún después de la entrega de Ulúa, el 23 de noviembre de 1825, persistieron los planes de reconquista de Nueva España, que se salpicaron desde 1826 a 1833, es decir, durante los últimos siete años de Fernando VII. La preferencia dada a la acariciada reconquista de México se fundaba tanto en las razones que hemos examinado ya, como en los efectos económicos que se derivarían, pues en razón de la riqueza del país, se calculaba que, en el caso de tener éxito, de el se lograrían fondos suficientes para otras expediciones, podía ser, pues, la cabeza de la reconquista para otras e incluso de toda América.
- ↑ Anaya Merchant, Luis (2002). Finanzas y política en el mundo iberoamericano. Del Antiguo Régimen a las naciones independientes (in español). p. 39.
En general, se afirma que las remesas americanas podían llegar a alcanzar -en sus mejores años- un 20 % de los ingresos totales fiscales de la metrópoli
- ↑ Sánchez Santiró, Ernest (2001). Finanzas y política en el mundo iberoamericano: del antiguo régimen a las naciones independientes (in español). p. 58.
- ↑ Obra escogida, by Guillermo Morón
- ↑ "Son ejecutados los coautores de la Conjura de Martín Cortés". www.memoriapoliticademexico.org (in español). Retrieved 2024-01-15.
- ↑ "Cercanía cordial al momento final de Gonzalo Pizarro: + 1548 – CHDE Trujillo". chdetrujillo.com (in español). Retrieved 2024-01-15.
- ↑ 45.0 45.1 Corsi Otálora, Luis (2007). "Cronología analítica motivacional del progreso independentista en Hispanoamérica". Anales de la Fundación Francisco Elías de Tejada (in español) (13): 135–139. ISSN 1137-117X. Retrieved 2024-01-15.
- ↑ "Actas de formación de juntas y declaraciones de independencia (1809-1822)" (in español).
- ↑ Acta de Independencia de Guatemala
- ↑ Acta de Independencia de San Salvador
- ↑ Semprún, Bullón (1992). El ejército realista en la independencia americana (in español).
- ↑ "Foreign Enlistment Bill". Parliament of the United Kingdom. June 28, 1819.
- ↑ Book titled "Las Guerras en el primer tercio del siglo XIX en España y América", published in 2004. Castañeda Delgado. Editorial Deimos. On pages 594-595 it states: In the first place one must stress the concept of Civil War, although many historians, given the lack of in-depth research on the situation and given the name by which it has gone down in history, "war of emancipation", have resorted to the typology that seemed evident: war of independence or liberation, when in reality 90% of the troops of the so-called royalist armies were of American origin, just as a significant percentage of the senior republican commanders were peninsular Spaniards by birth. Civil War has characteristics different from those of conventional war. In Civil War, acts of cruelty and indiscriminate slaughter alternate with acts of kindness and clemency. As the Civil War that some argue it was, the troops fought against were brothers, with both sides tending toward fraternization, unless hatred between the factions was stirred up. In the title: Consideraciones militares a la guerra de emancipación.
- ↑ However, if this position is accepted, one reaches the conclusion that the United States War of Independence was also a civil war.
- ↑ Bernardo Frías, Historia del General Güemes y de la provincia de Salta, o sea de la Independencia Argentina, Estudio Tipográfico de "El Cívico", 1907, pp. 22 and 23.
- ↑ Bidondo states that they came to number 3,000 men, but that the army was undermined from its formation by desertion.
- ↑ Bidondo, La expedición de auxilio a las provincias interiores (1810-1812), p. 242.
- ↑ Archivo general de la República Argentina, publication directed by Adolfo P. Carranza, published by G. Kraft, 1894, pp. 78 and 79.
- ↑ Paul Groussac, Santiago de Liniers, Conde de Buenos Aires, 1753-1810, Ed. Sopena, 1907.
- ↑ Sierra, Historia de la Argentina, vol. 5.
- ↑ Frías, Historia del General Güemes, pp. 159–160.
- ↑ 60.0 60.1 60.2 Antonio Emilio Castello, Historia de Corrientes, Ed. Plus Ultra, Bs. As., 1991. ISBN 950-21-0619-9
- ↑ Víctor N. Vasconsellos, Lecciones de Historia Paraguaya, author's edition, Asunción, 1974, p. 117.
- ↑ Ignacio Núñez, Noticias históricas de la República Argentina: Obra póstuma, 2nd edition, edited by Julio Núñez and published by Guillermo Kraft, 1898, p. 173.
- ↑ Secretaría General de Ejército, Semblanza histórica del Ejército Argentino, Buenos Aires, 1981, pp. 29 and 30.
- ↑ Nuestras banderas: vexilología argentina, p. 50. Published by Editorial Dunken. ISBN 987-02-1809-1
- ↑ Camogli, Batallas por la libertad, p. 154.
- ↑ Camogli, Batallas por la libertad, pp. 155-156.
- ↑ Beatriz Bosch, Historia de Entre Ríos, Ed. Plus Ultra, Bs. As., 1991. ISBN 950-21-0108-1
- ↑ The complete history of this squadron is in Ángel Justiniano Carranza, Campañas Navales de la República Argentina.
- ↑ Alejandro Horowicz, El país que estalló, vol. I, Ed. Sudamericana, Bs. As., 2004, p. 226. ISBN 950-07-2561-4
- ↑ Secretaría General de Ejército, Semblanza histórica del Ejército Argentino, Bs. As., 1981. pp. 29 and 30.
- ↑ Ruiz Moreno, Campañas militares argentinas, pp. 101-105.
- ↑ 72.0 72.1 Moacyr Flores, Dicionário de história do Brasil, 2nd ed., EDIPUCRS, 2001, 637 pp. ISBN 978-85-7430-209-6
- ↑ Blas Garay, La revolución de la independencia del Paraguay, Ed. Estudio Tipográfico de la viuda é hijos de Tello, 1897, pp. 151-153.
- ↑ Vasconsellos, Lecciones de Historia Paraguaya, p. 120.
- ↑ Sinopsis Histórica de la Fortaleza de Santa Teresa, in Rocha Info.com. Retrieved May 2010.
- ↑ José Feliciano Fernandes Pinheiro (visconde de S. Leopoldo), Annaes da Provincia de S. Pedro, Ed. Typ. Casimir, 1839, pp. 291-295.
- ↑ Archivo General de la Nación (Argentina), Política lusitana en el Río de la Plata, vol. 2, 1963, p. 322.
- ↑ 78.0 78.1 Navas Sierra, J. Alberto (2000). Utopía y atopía de la Hispanidad. El proyecto de Confederación Hispánica de Francisco Antonio Zea. Ediciones Encuentro. ISBN 9788474905946.
- ↑ Ruiz, Antonio Moreno (2023-02-07). "Los falsos planes de unión de los insurgentes (la confederación hispanocriolla de Bolívar)". Españoles de Cuba (in español). Retrieved 2024-01-15.
- ↑ Butrón Prida, Gonzalo (2023). "Negociar, transigir, conciliar. Los fundamentos de la política americana del Trienio Liberal". Pasado y Memoria (in español) (27).
- ↑ La independencia hispanoamericana un proceso singular
- ↑ Bértola, Luis & José Antonio Ocampo (2021). El desarrollo económico de América Latina desde la Independencia. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica, p. 72. ISBN 9786071640963.
- ↑ Ley y la Sangre Guerra de Razas. Thibaud
- ↑ Web Statistics of Wars, Oppressions and Atrocities of the Nineteenth Century
- ↑ Orellana, J. Gonzalo (1930). El Ecuador en cien años de independencia: 1830-1930. Vol. I. Quito: Escuela tipográfica salesiana, p. 30.
- ↑ Stornaiolo, Ugo (1999). Ecuador: anatomía de un país en transición. Quito: Editorial Abya Yala, p. 236. ISBN 9789978045541.
- ↑ Blanco-Fombona, Rufino (1981) [1902]. "La americanización del mundo". In Ensayos históricos. Caracas: Fundación Biblioteca Ayacucho, pp. 353-434 (see p. 404). Edited by Rafael Ramón Castellanos & Jesús Sanoja Hernández. Volume 36 of Biblioteca Ayacucho. ISBN 9788466000031. Based on the official census of 1825, which would serve in 1834 as the basis for the division of the public debt when Gran Colombia broke up. In Colección general de los Tratados públicos celebrados por Colombia y Venezuela, Caracas, Valentín Espinal, 1840, pp. 90-101. According to this study, the population of New Granada fell between 1810 and 1825 from 1,400,000 (Restrepo's estimate) to 1,228,259 inhabitants; that of Ecuador from 600,000 (Restrepo) to 491,996 inhabitants; and that of Venezuela from 975,972 (Dauxion-Lavayse) to 659,633 inhabitants. Rounding off the figures, the territories of Gran Colombia lost one fifth of their three million inhabitants.
- ↑ Carmona, Manuel G. (1860). "Fastos sangrientos de América. Ojeada sobre las guerras civiles desde la independencia hasta nuestros días". In Sociedad de Amigos de la Ilustración. Revista del Pacífico. Literaria y Científica. Vol. II. Valparaíso: Imprenta y librería del Mercurio de Santos Tornero, p. 505.
- ↑ Malamud, Carlos. Ruptura y reconciliación. España y el reconocimiento de las independencias (in español).
- ↑ Salazar Vergara, Gabriel; Pinto, Julio (1999–2002). Historia contemporánea de Chile (in español) (1st ed.). LOM Ediciones. ISBN 956-282-172-2. OCLC 41950283. Retrieved 2021-05-20.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: date format (link) - ↑ Michael P. Costeloe (2010). La respuesta a la Independencia: la España imperial y las revoluciones hispanoamericanas (in español). Fondo de Cultura Económica. p. 19. ISBN 978-968-16-3261-8.
- ↑ José Semprún (1998). Capitanes y virreyes: el esfuerzo bélico realista en la contienda de emancipación hispanoamericana (in español). Nuevo Mundo. p. 256. ISBN 8478236074.
Así pues la expedición Barradas es el último episodio bélico de carácter regular del proceso independentista en la América continental
[Thus the Barradas expedition is the last military episode of a regular character in the independence process in continental America] - ↑ Mariluz Urquijo, José María (1958). Los Proyectos españoles para reconquistar el Río de la Plata, 1820-1833 (in español). p. 13.
la política española respecto de América y particularmente del Río de la Plata persiguió como único objetivo hasta 1833 la reconquista del dominio perdido
[Spanish policy regarding America and particularly the Río de la Plata pursued as its sole objective until 1833 the reconquest of the lost dominion] - ↑ "La masiva expulsión de españoles de América: la infame historia que escondió la independencia". Diario ABC (in español). 2016-12-21. Retrieved 2025-03-15.
- ↑ "icsh.es". icsh.es (in español). Retrieved 2025-03-15.
- ↑ Establecimiento de relaciones diplomáticas Argentina,Paraguay y Uruguay
- ↑ El conflicto diplomático entre España y Perú 1824-1879
- ↑ "Tratado de paz y amistad celebrado entre España y la república Chilena" (in español). March 27, 2022.
- ↑ "Aniversario de las relaciones internacionales entre ambas naciones. Granma" (in español).
- ↑ Spain renounced its sovereignty in the Treaty of Paris of 1898. Therefore,
when the Republic of Cuba was born, Spain established immediate diplomatic relations. - ↑ Spain recognized the independence and established diplomatic relations
Further reading
- Guerra, François-Xavier (2009). Modernidad e independencias. Ensayos sobre las revoluciones hispánicas (in español). Encuentro. ISBN 9788474909876.
- Hamnett, Brian R. (1995a). «Las rebeliones y revoluciones iberoamericanas en la época de la Independencia. Un intento de tipología». In Guerra, François-Xavier (dir., 1995). Las revoluciones hispánicas: independencias americanas y liberalismo español, 47-72. Madrid: Editorial Complutense.
- González, Julio César (2010). Fundación Hernandarias (ed.). La involución hispanoamericana: de las provincias de las Españas a territorios tributarios : el caso Argentino, 1711-2010 (in español). Editorial Docencia. p. 976. ISBN 9789875061927.
- Lucena Giraldo, Manuel (2010). Naciones de rebeldes (in español). Taurus. ISBN 9788430607754.
- Lynch, John (1973). Las revoluciones hispanoamericanas 1808-1826 (in español).
- Mitre, Bartolomé (1950). Historia de San Martín y de la emancipación sudamericana (in español). Buenos Aires: El Ateneo.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link) - Tomás Pérez Vejo (2011). "«Las guerras de independencia como guerras civiles»" (in español). Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Retrieved May 1, 2012. (video)
- Reyes Cárdenas, Catalina (2009). «Balance y perspectivas de la historiografía sobre Independencia en Colombia».[dead link] Historia y Espacio (33): n.p. Retrieved May 1, 2012.
- Ullate Fabo, José Antonio (2009). Españoles que no pudieron serlo: la verdadera historia de la independencia de América (in español). Madrid: Libroslibres. p. 246. ISBN 9788492654185.
- Villoro, Luis (2002). El proceso ideológico de la revolución de independencia. Mexico City: Conaculta.






