Burkholder, 2016, Spain S America From Kingdoms To Colonies

Colonial Latin American Review
ISSN: 1060-9164 (Print) 1466-1802 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ccla20
Spains America: from kingdoms to colonies
Mark A. Burkholder
To cite this article: Mark A. Burkholder (2016) Spains America: from kingdoms to colonies,
Colonial Latin American Review, 25:2, 125-153, DOI: 10.1080/10609164.2016.1205241
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10609164.2016.1205241
Published online: 13 Sep 2016.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 106
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ccla20
Download by: [Universidad Nacional Andres Bello] Date: 06 November 2016, At: 17:37
COLONIAL LATIN AMERICAN REVIEW, 2016
VOL. 25, NO. 2, 125153
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10609164.2016.1205241
Spains America: from kingdoms to colonies1

Mark A. Burkholder
Department of History, University of MissouriSt. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
The vast and precious dominions owned by Spain in the Indies are
not properly colonies or factories as are those of other nations,
but an essential and integral part of the Spanish monarchy.
Proclamation by the Junta Central, 22 January 1809
During the rebellion against Columbus begun in Espaola in 1497, its leader Francisco
Roldn rejected the idea that he and the other settlers should be considered colonists,
a term whose multiple meanings included laborers working on rented land. Instead, he
demanded recognition as vecinos, municipal householders and citizens who enjoyed
the rights of Castilian law (see Elliott 2006, 9). His point held. For more than three
centuries, Spaniards who lived in the western hemisphere eschewed identication as
colonists in favor of terms that included conquistadors, settlers (pobladores), their
descendants, and, by the late eighteenth century, American Spaniards, or simply
Americans.
Similarly, the word colonies failed to win acceptance in Spains America before 1808
1811, despite immigrants understanding that it typically denoted settlements [of Spa-
niards] outside their homeland.2 Accompanied by a reduction of the Indian population
to a minority in many locations, the almost complete absence of colonies in the nomen-
clature of Spains possessions attests to Jorge Klor de Alvas (1992) proposition that inde-
pendence in Spanish America was not decolonization nor did postcolonialism follow it.3
His conclusion strengthens the argument here that the Spanish-descended population
recognized the validity of kingdoms but not colonies as an appropriate identication
of their American homelands into the nineteenth century.4
Scholarly references to Spains American dominions as colonies are commonplace, as
is the use of Colonial Spanish America, a conventional identication for the Indies from
Columbus to Independence. Even historians who explicitly note that Spains realms were
not ofcially colonies, subsequently refer to them as such. In doing so, they follow an
Anglophone tradition that has termed these lands colonies since at least the early seven-
teenth century (Smith 1632, 148).
Spains American kingdoms with rich mines, large subject populations, and settle-
ments extending from the present United States to Chile evoked envy among its European
rivals. In response, the English, French and Dutch started in the early seventeenth century
to found colonies or plantations in the Caribbean islands and on the mainland of the
western hemisphere. While these less auspicious terms satised other European govern-
ments, native sons in Spains America proudly emphasized the regal label attached to
their patrias.5 With the crisis resulting from the abdications of 1808 as well as the Amer-
ican deputies 1811 loss in the Cortes of Cdiz over immediate implementation of
2016 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group on behalf of CLAR
126 M. A. BURKHOLDER
equality in that body, however, they increasingly altered their patriotic vocabulary. By the
mid-1820s, politically engaged citizens of the new countries regularly identied their pre-
independence realms as colonies and were employing the neologism coloniaje to desig-
nate the era of Spanish rule.
Numerous documents testify to the Spanish monarchs including for centuries King-
doms of the Indies in their titular glory.6 Ferdinand and Isabels daughter Doa Juana
identied herself as Queen of the Indies in 1508; her son Charles I listed the Kingdom
of the Indies among his extensive patrimony. The great Compilation of the Laws of the
Kingdoms of the Indies issued in 1681 underscored the presence of reynos (kingdoms
or realms) in the Americas. More than a century later, Charles IVs ofcial designations
included King of the East and West Indies.7 In 1809 the Junta Central, Spains tempor-
ary government of resistance to the French, declared the countrys distant dominions (an
all-inclusive term) an essential and integral part of the Spanish monarchy, rather than
properly colonies.
This article documents how Spaniards born in Europe (peninsulars) and the Indies
(native sons and other creoles) identied Spains mainland possessions in the Americas
during its centuries of rule. It emphasizes that the shift to relabeling the kingdoms as
colonies effectively started in Spain in the 1760s.8 This change reected the latter
terms growing popularity there via translated foreign publications, as well as some
royal ministers ambitions to modernize the empire through greater administrative uni-
formity, centralization, and a modest liberalization of the Atlantic trade. More impor-
tantly, discussion, decisions, proclamations, Cortes debates, and political tracts
published after Charles IV and Ferdinand VII abdicated in 1808 repeatedly referred to
colonies or, in belated acceptance of a neutral phrase used in the Constitution of 1812,
the overseas provinces (provincias de ultramar).9
In the Indies, native sons and other creoles after 1808 increasingly endowed the word
colonies with a derogatory character that mirrored a rapidly expanding anti-peninsular
and anti-metropole sentiment. Rebels, moreover, began to adopt the persona of aggrieved
colonists as a justication for breaking the bonds with the Spanish Crown. With the
emergence of independent countries, native-son politicians and writers routinely con-
demned the preceding 300 years as the colonial era. Two centuries later, colonial still
exudes a pejorative avor (Lemprire 2004, paras. 4, 7).
Kingdoms of the Crown of Castile

When Columbus returned from his initial exploratory voyage to what he called the
Indies, Castilian monarchs already had a long history of incorporating new lands into
their possessions. Placing the incompletely conquered Canary Islands in our patrimony
and royal Crown in 1487, Ferdinand and Isabel expanded their titles with King and
Queen of the Canary Islands (Fernndez-Armesto 1982, 119). Granada followed in
1492, and Alexander VIs papal donation in 1493 added las Indias, islas e tierra-rme
del mar Oceano to the Crown of Castile. Queen Isabels will of 1504 specically men-
tioned the incorporation of Granada, the Canary Islands, and the lands discovered and
to be discovered in the Ocean Sea in her kingdoms of Castile and Len.10 Charles I
underscored this commitment in September 1519 when he declared the Indies inalienable
COLONIAL LATIN AMERICAN REVIEW 127
in whole or part from his maternal inheritance.11 King of the Indies, islands, and main-
land of the Ocean Sea was, in fact, the longest of the 20 titles that he listed in 1554.12
The presence of identiable rulers, nobilities, and sophisticated states in central Mexico
and Peru inuenced Castilians to designate them as kingdoms. In his second letter to
Charles V, Fernando Corts enthused over the new kingdoms (nuevos reinos) that the
emperor now possessed.13 Dominican Bartolom de las Casass Brief Account of the
Destruction of the Indies referred to the Kingdom of Mexico, the Kingdoms of Peru,
and the New Kingdom of Granada (1552, 27, 48). The title-page of the rst book pub-
lished in Peru, the trilingual catechism of 1584, proudly read, Antonio Ricardo rst
printer in these Kingdoms of Peru (Doctrina 1584). The plural form for New Spain
appears less frequently, although a 1683 book of ordinances for the City of Mexico bore
the title, Head of the Kingdoms of New Spain.14
Spains designation of American possessions as kingdoms proved unique among
European powers. Although not identifying them individually in their titles, Castiles
Habsburg monarchs referred routinely to the Kingdom of New Spain, the Kingdom of
Peru, and the New Kingdom of Granada: the remaining territories included both king-
doms, e.g., Quito and Chile, and provinces, e.g., Venezuela. Alternative identication
included viceroyalty, audiencia, presidency, and eventually captaincy-general. Signi-
cantly, Habsburg monarchs considered none of these territorial units to be colonies.
From Philip V to Isabel II, no Bourbon monarchs titles referred to colonies either.
Frequently the rulers summarized their holdings; for example, king of Spain and of the
Indies identied Charles III in the Treaty of Paris in 1763.15 The ratication of the
treaty, however, provided the multiple titles,16 and references to Spains America as king-
doms persisted into the early nineteenth century.17 Upon returning from his gilded cap-
tivity in France, Ferdinand VII employed the same titles as his grandfather; in 1833 he
bequeathed them to his heir.18
Spains kingdoms and rivals colonies

The chronology and nature of European exploration and settlement in the western hemi-
sphere, as well as the peoples encountered, affected the terminology that governments
applied to their new lands. In the sixteenth century, Spanish conquistadors and settlers
founded cities and towns in kingdoms. When non-Iberian European states subsequently
planted colonies in the Indies, they found no kingdoms to conquer.19
In establishing permanent settlements, the English, French, and Dutch used either
colony or its synonym to them. The charter for Virginia in 1606, for example, employed
colony, habitation, and plantation, while Plymouths read, Colony of New Plymouth
(1629) (White 1898, 149). In 1688 a French author, Saint-Vallier, Jean-Baptiste de la
Croix de Chevris de Saint-Vallier, published La colonie franaise dans la Nouvelle
France. The Dictionary of the French Academy in 1694 dened colonie by referring to
the several French colonies in the New World (p. 211). The Dutch also applied
kolonie to an overseas settlement, e.g., Nieuw-Amsterdam, Nieuw Nederlandt.
The best-known modern claim that the Indies were not colonies remains Argentine
historian Ricardo Levenes ([1951] 1973) book by that title. But explicit denial of their
colonial status appeared much earlier. Deputies to the Cortes of Cdiz for Peru and
Chile, exile Fray Servando Teresa de Mier (1813) of New Spain, and other creoles
emphasized that the equality inherent in the Indies as an integral part of the Crown of
Castile dated from the early sixteenth century. Mier also reminded readers that Spains
monarchs had assumed the title kings of the Indies (Guerra 1813, 63839n).20
Foreign views of colonies

If kingdoms were lands over which a monarch ruled, what characterized colonies? Promi-
nent foreign authors offered answers. Josiah Child, an English merchant, politician, and
Governor of the East India Company, devoted a chapter to the synonymous plantations
or colonies in his popular A New Discourse of Trade (1698, 178216). All of them, he
wrote, do endamage [sic] their Mother-Kingdoms, whereof the Trades of such Plantations
are not conned by severe laws and good Executions of those Laws, by the Mother-
Kingdom (Child 1698, 179). Colonies should neither produce the same commodities as
their mother-kingdom nor be allowed to ship goods directly to any foreign country.21
Thus Child argued for the metropoles control over both manufacturing and trade.
When he compared English colonies with those of the Dutch, French, Portuguese, and
Spanish, the last fared worst (ibid., 20003).22
Montesquieu (1748) discussed colonies at length in The Spirit of the Laws. Those in the
western hemisphere were under a kind of dependence to their founding mother country,
which compensated for their acceptance of commercial restrictions by protecting them
either through arms or law (1748, 36768). In the early 1750s, a Spanish translation
appeared of a French translation of Joshua Gees Trade and Navigation of Great Britain
Considered (1753).23 Although the book employed the word colonies at least one
hundred times, it referred to colonies of Spain only once.
Three major publications in the 1770s devoted substantial attention to colonies, among
which they included Spains dominions in the Americas. The appearance in French of
Abb Raynals (1770) A Philosophical and Political History of the Settlements and Trade
of the Europeans in the East and West Indies routinely applied colonies to these domin-
ions in a broad condemnation of Spanish rule. The translated volumes (17841790) used
the word ultramarinos, giving broad circulation to a term that would become routine
after 1808. Adam Smith (1776) devoted more than 100 pages of The Wealth of Nations
to colonies, among them Spains overseas holdings (pp. 704841). His analysis became
available in Castilian in 1794. William Robertsons (1777) celebrated History of America
followed English and French practice, applied colonies to Spains American possessions,
and outlined the metropoles jealous attention to secure their dependence. As a result,
persons sent by Europe lled all posts of consequence (Robertson 1780, 31617).
Eminent foreign authors, in short, informed readers that Spains relationship to its Amer-
ican kingdoms equated to that of a mother country and its colonies.
Peninsulars and creoles, of course, knew and used the word colonies in both its classic
and modern meanings, but rarely did ofcial documents apply it to Spains America.24 The
Royal Academys Diccionario de autoridades in 1729 dened colonia as a settlement
populated by foreigners and exemplied by the 25 Roman colonies founded in Spain.
At a less erudite level, the Gazeta de Madrid provided translated (and censored) news
from London about Englands North American colonies.25 Items appeared frequently
when disagreements strained relations between them and their mother country. For
example, toward the end of 1764, provincial governors received an order intended to
secure (asegurar) the[ir] colonies dependence on the Crown.26 The Gazeta of 19 March
1765 mentioned colonial agents and opposition to a stamp tax.27 The following spring,
the paper reported that the House of Lords was considering an act to secure the depen-
dence of the Colonies of America.28
English settlements in the western hemisphere included colony (or plantation) in
their names, as everyone recognized.29 The Second Continental Congress adopted the
title Thirteen United Colonies in July 1775 and retained it until the Declaration of Inde-
pendence. That document referred repeatedly to these Colonies until unambiguously
replacing them in the nal paragraph: these United Colonies are, and of right ought to
be, FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES (see Armitage 2007).
Mention of this declaration of total independence of the Colonies appeared in the
Gazeta de Madrid in September 1776.30 When publishing Charles IIIs decision in 1779
to break relations with Britain, the paper noted the Court of Londons disagreements
with its American Colonies and France.31 New terminology nally appeared in February
1783 when the Gazeta reported that commissioners of the United States of America and
the Crown of Great Britain had agreed to peace and open recognition that the thirteen
states were free, sovereign, and independent.32
Given foreign authors application of colonies to Spains overseas realms, the copious
references to Britains colonies in the Spanish press, and Spanish ministers desire for their
country to emulate Englands successful Atlantic trade, it is not surprising that some royal
advisors started to refer to colonies at the expense of kingdoms of the Indies.33
Pursuing a new relationship: Spain and the Indies, 1760s1808

Stripped of non-Iberian lands in Europe by the treaties that ended the War of Spanish Suc-
cession, Spain and its America appeared much like other European states with distant,
overseas colonies (see Pagden 1995a, 326). Nonetheless, Spanish writers employed the
word only occasionally in the early eighteenth century. Political economist Gernimo
de Uztrizs (1742) extended examination of commerce emphasized the monarchs
immense (dilatadssimos) kingdoms, and provinces in America, but seldom referred to
them as colonies. Rather, he applied the term primarily to the overseas possessions of
Spains rivals: England, France, Holland, and Portugal (Uztriz 1968, e.g. 95). Similarly,
Bernardo de Ulloas (1740) work used the word only when referring to non-Spanish
dominions. Jorge Juan and Antonio de Ulloas (1826) celebrated critique of conditions
in the Kingdoms of Peru, written in 1749, used colony and colonies in the same way.
Soon after Charles IIIs accession, a relatively unknown peninsular lawyer named Jos
de Glvez penned a manuscript titled A Vassals Discourse and Reections on the Deca-
dence of Our Spanish Indies (Navarro Garca 1998, 19)34 In it, the future visitor-general of
New Spain and Minister of the Indies employed colonias repeatedly when mentioning
English, French, and Portuguese possessions in the America, but never in direct reference
to Spains (ibid., 149).35 His more than 20 other referents included: the Kingdom of New
Spain, the Kingdom of Peru, the kingdoms of Guatemala and Tierra Firme, Spanish
America, our Indies, our dominions and possessions, our territories, and those king-
doms. Despite the careful avoidance of applying colonies to Spains possessions, he
lamented the competition between Spanish imports and American and East Asian textiles.
Spains commercial interest, he argued, required the population of the Indies not
becoming accustomed to living independently of the necessities it provided (ibid., 139).

Thus Glvez advocated the Americas economic dependence on the mother country, a
central plank of a colonial commercial system, even with that label omitted. Before the
decade ended, however, he had joined a growing ministerial chorus, using colonies as
well as kingdoms, provinces, and dominions in a proposal to extend the intendant
system to New Spain (Navarro Garca 1959, 16567).36 As Minister of the Indies
(17761787), he sought to strengthen royal control in America by establishing the inten-
dant system under the same terms as in Spain, save for not encouraging manufacturing, an
activity prohibited in the colonies.37 While not employing colonias in the Royal Ordi-
nances that accompanied the creation of intendants, Charles III used the Kingdom of
New Spain in the documents title (Real Ordenanza 1786).
Also in the early 1760s, Pedro Rodrguez de Campomanes, a royal minister and increas-
ingly inuential political economist, wrote Reections on Spanish Commerce to the Indies,
a lengthy manuscript nally published in 1988.38 Campomanes considered Spains Amer-
ican dominions comparable to the British and French colonies and encouraged the use of
overseas provinces (provincias ultramarinas) instead of kingdoms of the Indies (Pagden
1995b, 12425). Comparing the Spanish Colonies of the West Indies to possessions of his
nations rivals, he concluded that the latter furnished greater benet to their metropoles.
Consequently he advocated free trade within Spains empire to restore its merchant
marine and naval superiority; effective economic exploitation of her colonies was to be
the elixir to revitalize the metropole.
Despite his ardent comments on exploiting Spains colonies in 1762, Campomanes
advocated a milder and more nuanced position six years later in a recommendation to
the Council of Castile co-authored with its other scal Jos del Moino, future Conde
de Floridablanca. Unanimously supported by the Council, the two scales proposal
explicitly described the possessions in the Indies not as a pura colonia, but rather
as some powerful and large provinces of the Spanish Empire (Navarro Garca 1996,
204). Given his 1762 use of colonies, it is also striking that Campomanes referred
to neither Spanish colonies in the Indies nor provincias ultramarinas in his 500-
page Apndice a la educacin popular (Madrid, 1775), but used kingdoms of the
Indies nearly two dozen times. He similarly applied our overseas dominions and
Reynos de las Indias, but not Spanish colonies in the lengthy Discurso sobre la edu-
cacin popular de los artesanos y su fomento (Madrid, 1775). Presumably he appreciated
that readers in the Indies would take umbrage to references to their patrias as
colonies.39
While royal ministers might discuss Spains colonies among themselves, Spanish
authors typically limited the term to English, French, Dutch, and Portuguese possessions.
For example, Asturian Francisco Alvarez (1778) published Information of the Establish-
ment and Population of the English Colonies in North America (p. 6). In the following
year the professor of public law at the Royal Seminary of Nobles in Madrid devoted a
section to colonies in a textbook on civil economy or commerce. He stressed the distinc-
tion between ancient Greek colonies designed to export surplus population and contem-
porary European ones that focused only on expanding commerce. All European
metropoles limited colonial trade to themselves and sought to have their colonies
provide complementary agricultural products dependent on metropolitan shippers. In
this manner the mutual needs of the colonies and the metropole made their union indis-
soluble (Danvila y Villarrasa 1779, 16466).
In 1779 the posthumous work Economic Proposal (Proyecto econmico) appeared.
Allegedly authored in 1762 by Bernardo Ward (1779), former secretary of the Junta de
Comercio y Moneda, it warranted a fourth printing in 1787. The author explicitly asserted
that Spains Indies consisted not in islands and colonies, but in kingdoms and huge (vas-
tsimos) empires (1779, xiii). In contrast, he referred dozens of times to English and
French colonies in the Americas. Implementation of his proposals, however, would
have turned Spains kingdoms and provinces in the Indies into de facto colonies patterned
after those of its rivals.
For Ward, conditions in the Indiesthat piece [porcin] of the Spanish Monarchy
emphatically exposed Spains need to rule them differently. So rich a possession gives us
advantages that [should] have some relationship to the vastness of the distant dominions
and the value [precioso] of its products. Yet these resources were failing to provide Spain
with commensurate benets. The foreign colonies of Martinique and Barbados provided
more prots to their owners than Spain received from all of its islands, provinces, king-
doms, and empires in America (Ward 1779, 225).40 Selective imitation was Wards key to
success. The Spanish Crown must learn from other nations colonial policies how to maxi-
mize benets from the Indies.
Abb Juan Nuixs (1782) Reexiones imparciales sobre la humanidad de los espaoles en
las Indias maintained that the Spaniards founded only one Colony, comprised of a large
number of population centers (establecimientos), all subject to the same Government, and
all obligated to provide mutual assistance (p. 144). No other European colony had main-
tained itself for three centuries, as had that of Spain (ibid., 238). Of course, Spains posses-
sions, which Nuix frequently and inconsistently referred to as our colonies, were
dependent on the metropolis, but such dependence was commonplace among all colonies,
especially in their early stages (ibid., 86, 90, 109). With ill-disguised glee, he noted that
England had lost its [13 American] colonies while Spain still maintained its possessions
(ibid., 53).
In 1789 a publisher introduced a new book allegedly written in 1743, the year of his
death, by minister of the Indies Jos del Campillo. Identical to Wards treatise in places
and, indeed, perhaps written by Ward himself, The New System of Economic Government
for America outlined proposals that promised to increase Spains prots from the Indies.41
The author argued for policies that would: allow multiple ports to participate in the trade;
limit American consumption to national products; permit only Spanish ships and crews to
ship goods; and give the government an active role in overseeing trade for the benet of the
monarchys total population. Clearly delineating a desirable colonial relationship from the
Crowns perspective, the New System advocated limitations on colonial manufactures,
thereby forcing Americas residents to purchase goods produced in Spain. The author
stressed rather fancifully that Americas large Indian population was the potential
source of real riches that neither England nor France could match. Shamelessly he rec-
ommended increasing the population by copying the French and English practice of
sending public women and habitual criminals (facinerosos) to the Indies and adding
gypsies as well.42
The New System recommended other ways to increase the Indies value to Spain. The
Crown should send visitors-general to report current conditions in the Americas and to
identify needed changes. It should introduce regular, frequent mail service to improve
communication and allow only men with true vocations to enter the clergy. A reduction
in clerical expenditures would use resources more effectively and less celibacy and more
marriages would lead to increased population (Campillo y Coso 1789, 4649). The assign-
ment of intendants throughout the Americas would better administration. Finally, the
introduction of free trade within the empire accompanied by a simpler system of taxation
was essential. If implemented fully, the changes outlined in the New System would trans-
form the New World realms into colonies, a term the author employed repeatedly, but
almost always in reference to the overseas dependencies of the French and English.
Their populations would produce raw materials, purchase nished goods, and not
compete with Spanish producers (ibid., passim).
About the same time as the New System appeared, the Conde de Floridablanca (1787)
was at the height of his distinguished career. Believing that the newly created Junta de
Estado could bring better administration to both Spain and the Americas, he wrote a
detailed set of instructions for its consideration. Authored near the conclusion of
Charles IIIs reign and written as if by the monarch, the condential document provided
an excellent opportunity for the rst minister to spell out his views on Spains distant pos-
sessions. Instead of emphasizing them as colonies, he referred to them only once, in the
phrase our Indies, islands, and other distant colonies. Additionally, he employed once the
phrase kingdoms (reinos) of the Indies (Moino y Redondo 1839, 261, 157). The term
that appeared more frequently was the more generic dominions, as in my dominions
of the Indies and Spains overseas dominions (ibid. 198, 279). Labeling the Indies colo-
nies had not swept aside the older reference to kingdoms. Yet the newer attitude was
spreading in Spain.
Undoubtedly spoken more frequently than printed, Spanish colonies, whether puras
or not, encapsulated the vision for the New World realms shared by Campomanes, Jos de
Glvez, Conde de Floridablanca, Gaspar Melchor de Jovellanos (unk./1859), and other
well-known ofcials and authors.43 As a councilor of the Indies, former visitor-general
of Peru Jorge de Escobedo avoided the use but not the meaning of colonies when he
remarked in 1804 that the Councils dilatory behavior on a particular issue threatened
to ruin these lands (paises) from which we want to sacar el jugo.44
By 1800 some European Spaniards and occasional native sons were applying colonies
in print to lands that most of the latter still considered their kingdoms.45 In Lima, the
ambitious native son professor Jos Baqujano y Carrillo mentioned Spanish colonies
once in his lengthy dissertation on commerce in Peru.46 Peninsular Councilor of the
Indies Rafael Antnez y Acevedo (1797) published a book on Spaniards commerce and
legislation with their Colonies in the Indies. He asserted that all colonies by their
nature existed for their founders commercial advantage (p. 267). Similarly, but in a manu-
script, Viceroy of New Spain Conde de Revillagigedo II (1794) instructed his successor,
Marqus de Branciforte, to remember, that this is a colony that should depend on its
parent (matriz) Spain and provide it with benets in exchange for protection (Gmez
Pacheco de Padilla Horcasitas y Aguayo 1831, 9091).47
Isidoro de Antilln (1806), an attorney and catedrtico at the Royal Seminary of Nobles
in Madrid, spelled out colonies precisely in a textbook: Modern colonies are establish-
ments of cultivation and commerce in distant parts of the world, that depend absolutely
on their metropolis (p. 19). In the same year, an English translation of F. de Ponss (1806)
A Voyage to the Eastern Part of Terra Firma or the Spanish Main devoted a chapter to the
form of government which Spain has devised for her colonies; together with the kind of
connection contrived to keep them dependent (p. xxv). In 1807, the peninsular arch-
bishop of La Plata referred to these ourishing and remote colonies (Mox y de Francoli
1808, 45). Conrming the infrequency of such mentions, however, historian Ann Twinam
found the word colonies only once in thousands of pages of documents she examined
while doing research for her magisterial Purchasing Whiteness (2015, 66, 275).
The shift to explicitly stated status as colonies proceeded slowly, unevenly, and incom-
pletely. No royal order retitled Spains American kingdoms as colonies. Indeed the cele-
brated Reglamento (1778) that outlined the terms for the expansion of free trade within
the empire used colonia only once, in reference to Louisiana; in contrast, it employed
kingdoms more than a dozen times.48 While Charles III emphasized union and equality
(unin e igualdad) of these and those realms in 1787,49 he had revised commercial policy,
modied administration and taxation to increase revenue, and discriminated against
native sons in appointments to high positions. These actions did nothing to wean their
self-identication away from the kingdoms of the Indies or to strengthen their love for
Spain as Campomanes and Floridablanca had outlined in 1768.
In the eight authorizations for new consulados in the Indies (17931795), colony
appeared only once, in Havanas. There it referred to Cuba, the Spanish counterpart to
French and British sugar colonies.50 In contrast, in late 1808, the three peninsular scales
of the Audiencia of Mexico scathingly characterized New Spain as subordinated and a
true colony since its conquest.51 A comment attributed to a prominent peninsular
oidor on the court asserted the jurisdictions political dependence as follows: So long as
a one-eyed Manchegan mule exists in Spain, it should rule the Mexicans.52
The crisis of 1808

The Affair of the Escorial and arrival of French troops in Spain in October 1807, the coup
dtat at Aranjuez the following March, and the famous Dos de Mayo uprising in Madrid
presaged catastrophe. The abdications of Charles IV and Ferdinand VII at Bayonne later
in the month shocked peninsular Spaniards into unprecedented consideration of mon-
archical despotism and native sons in the Americas into reection on their patrias
relationship to Spain. In a published statement about his action, Ferdinand referred
twice to the Spanish Monarchys overseas colonies (colonias ultramarinas).53 Campo-
manes and like-minded ministers would have approved the sentiment, but probably
omitted the reference.
The formation of local and provincial juntas on the peninsula began within days; all
pledged to oppose the French, maintain Catholicism, and rule in Ferdinand VIIs name
until his return. The rst of a kaleidoscope of governments of resistance to Napoleon,
the juntas avowed that, with the monarchs absence, sovereignty reverted to the people
and thus legitimized their claim to rule. Concern for the retention of our colonies sur-
faced immediately. As one provincial junta summarized, a central government would
provide the only means of maintaining the integrity of the Monarchy and the dependence
of its immense Colonies.54
The crisis quickly prompted bringing together provincial juntas representatives in a
Suprema Junta Gubernativa del Reino that rst met in Aranjuez in September 1808.
Better known as the Junta Central, the body issued a manifesto on 26 October that justied
its existence and outlined its objectives, noting the desirability of close relations with our
Colonies (Maniesto 1809, 15). Several months later it called for the election of American
representatives to join it. A series of military defeats, among other causes, led the Junta
Central to appoint a Regency and resign in January 1810. Claiming legitimacy, the new
body issued instructions for the convocation of a cortes that would include some American
deputies, as had the recent cortes in Bayonne that Napoleon had assembled to approve a
constitution.
The appearance of juntas in Spain stimulated efforts to assert local autonomy in several
parts of the Americas. These would soon spawn independence movements in Buenos
Aires, Caracas, and parts of New Granada. Accompanied by unprecedented freedom of
the press, news and commentary on events in Spain and the Indies provided a plethora
of published sources for the years 18081814. Changing terminology did not come over-
night, but reected a growing reconguration of New World kingdoms into colonies.
Reference to kingdom appeared in the title and repeatedly in the text of the Mexico
City councils reaction to the rst notices of the commotions in Spain (Representacin
1808, 15259). Several days later, the city council of Vera Cruz referred to both this
kingdom and this precious colony (Expresiones 1808, 17274). A tract published in
Valencia in 1808 called for agreement with the colonies for their interests matched
those of Spain and as good sons are worthy of the inheritance of the mother country
(Mordello y Spotorno 1808, 9).
Napoleon explicitly acknowledged the Indies importance when he immediately sent
agents to the Americas in a vain effort to obtain his brothers recognition as their new
monarch. The Constitution of Bayonne of 1808 formally referred to Don Jos Napolen,
by the grace of God, King of the Spains and of the Indies. Although a draft of this charter
had used colonies, two American deputies secured the words elimination. The nal
document devoted an entire section (Title X) to the kingdoms and Spanish provinces
of America and Asia; reference to colonies had disappeared.55
Also in 1808, the junta created in Seville titled itself the Supreme Junta of Spain and
the Indies. When reporting in September that the Junta Central Suprema y Guberna-
tiva del Reino had assumed authority, interim president Conde de Floridablanca
referred to the new body as the Junta Central de Gobierno de los Reinos de Espaa
y de las Indias.56 The Council of Regency of Spain and the Indies (Consejo de Regen-
cia de Espaa e Indias) replaced the Junta Central in early 1810. These titles empha-
sized that Spain and the Indies formed a single unit, the unin Charles III had
sought.
In this uncharted political context, the arrival of silver in Cdiz accentuated the
metropoles long noticed dependence on the Indies, a reversal of what contemporaries
termed colonial dependence.57 Between 1802 and 1804 Spain received more American
silver and goldover 100 million pesosthan during any other triennium in the
history of the empire; about 40 percent went to the Crown (Marichal 2007, 15455).
Between December 1808 and February 1811, nearly 30 million American silver pesos
arrived in Cdiz (Marichal 2001, 58). Approximately half of this amount reached the
Junta Central between January and October 1809 (ibid., 216). Small wonder that gov-
ernments of resistance employed owery if not attering language in addressing those
kingdoms.
Declarations of equality
A decree by the Junta Central and another by the Regency provided the background to the
American deputies rst major legislative effort at the Cortes of Cdiz that opened in late
September 1810. The decree of 22 January 1809 stated: the vast and precious dominions
owned by Spain in the Indies are not properly colonies or factories such as those of other
nations, but an essential and integral part of the Spanish monarchy; therefore they must
send deputies to serve on the Junta Central.
Americans from Buenos Aires to New Spain applauded the decree. In the former,
Mariano Moreno praised this solemn proclamation that will shape Americas most bril-
liant epoch.58 The city of Quretaro declared its jubilation.59 In Venezuela, the Gaceta de
Caracas enthused that Americas happy days begin with this memorable order.60 These
writers highlighted the positive part of the assertion, what Spains possessions were (and
were to be)an essential and integral part of the Spanish monarchy. A set of reections
prepared for New Granadas deputy to the Junta Central summarized the past and the pro-
spective future bluntly: America is no longer reputed as some colonies of slaves, con-
demned always to work; the doors are open to it, it is declared an integral part of the
State and will be given the distinguished place that corresponds to it (quoted in
Almarza Villalobos and Martnez Garnica 2008, 63).
Other commentators were less charitable. A political catechism in Chile emphasized the
past in labeling the declaration not only injurious and insulting but also deceptive: We
have been colonists and our provinces have been colonies and miserable factories.61 Fray Ser-
vando Teresa de Mier (1813) coolly judged the 1809 order as the Junta Centrals response to
its indecorous ight from Aranjuez to Seville and dire need for nancial assistance (Guerra
1813, 253). The 1813 Congress of Chilpancingo agreed, noting, the illusory promises of
equality with which [the Junta Central] prepared us [to give] donativos (Mendibil 1828, 389).
Exile Jos Blanco White (1810) in El Espaol interpreted the 22 January decree as proclaim-
ing the independence of [Spains] colonies when it declared that its possessions in Asia and
America should not consider themselves colonies in the future, but as integral parts of the
Spanish empire. As provinces of the realm rather than dependent colonies no future gov-
ernment could return them to colonial status except by their consent or by force.62 Nonethe-
less, the journalist repeatedly referred to the possessions as colonies in his commentaries. Also
writing in England, Alvaro Flrez Estrada (1811) applied colonies to Spains Americas.63
Indeed old habits died hard. In early 1809 the Junta Central slipped up, referring to
colonies as loyal and Spanish as their Metropole.64 A decree of 1 September 1809 men-
tioned Spains rich colonies.65 In the same month, the town fathers of Yecla commented
on the future composition of the cortes, observing that the assembly should determine the
part in it that the colonies should have.66 In January 1810, a list of cash and goods arriv-
ing from Vera Cruz referred to this extraordinary aid that we have just received from our
vast colonies.67 In contrast, the imperial city of Mexico, head of the realm, reminded its
representative to the Junta Central that he was deputy of these kingdoms.68
The decree of 14 February 1810

Before representatives sailing from the Indies could reach Spain, the Junta Central ceded
its exhausted authority and claim to sovereignty to a handpicked ve-member Regency.
On 14 February 1810, the new government of resistance issued a decree that built on the
Junta Centrals proclamation of 1809. Reiterating that those dominions [are] an integral
and essential part of the Spanish monarchy with the same rights and prerogatives as the
Metropole, the decree promised that the election of native son deputies to the Cortes
would end the exploitation of their patrias. From this moment, Spanish Americans,
you are elevated to the dignity of free men; no longer are you under a yoke that was
heavier the farther you were from the center of power; looked upon with indifference,
molested by cupidity, and destroyed by ignorance. In other words, Spanish Americans
were no longer slaves under a yoke, two terms directly linked to both a lack of liberty
and colonial status.69
Disseminated throughout the Indies, this indictment of Spanish rule provided language
that revolutionaries could and did embrace.70 A junta in Caracas drew from the docu-
ments prose when justifying its existence in May 1810.71 Cleric Gregorio Funes (1817)
quoted from the decree while observing that Buenos Aires was escaping a decrepit and
tyrannical mother (p. 486). American agent H. M. Brackenridge (1819) remarked:
Such was the language of extraordinary concession to the oppressed colonies, by the
regency of Spain in this desperate moment of her affairs (2:23738n.).
The decree of 15 October 1810

Even more important than the two electoral invitations in clarifying the status of the
American realms was the Cortes decree of 15 October 1810. Although a permanent min-
ority, American deputies to the assembly generally formed a persistent and adept faction.
On 25 September 1810, the day after the Cortes declared itself the legitimate embodiment
of national sovereignty, they introduced a proposal for transmitting the formal account of
the bodys installation to the overseas dominions. Specically, they recommended attach-
ing an unambiguous statement that endorsed equal rights for American and European
Spaniards and pledged an increase in Americas national representation as an integral
part of the monarchy.72
Rejecting protests from some peninsular deputies, the Americans refused to yield. On 3
October,73 they asked the Cortes to reafrm explicitly the earlier decrees and to reiterate
that the overseas dominions were an integral part of the Spanish monarchy. Bowing to
the topics sensitive nature, subsequent discussion occurred behind closed doors.74
Finally, on 10 October, an entire session focused on the Americans primary demand:
that the Cortes ratify the earlier declarations en favor de las Americas and establish
the principle that the Overseas dominions were an integral part of the Monarchy and
equal in rights to the mother country.75 Discussion claried that many European depu-
ties opposed the inclusion of the different castas and peoples of color in determining the
number of American representatives.
The following night, deputy Vicente Morales Durez of Peru advocated dropping
language that granted the castas pardas equality with other subjects in the Indies.76
This break in American solidarity enabled the Cortes to endorse a compromise that
asserted, the indisputable (inconcuso) concept that the Spanish domains in both hemi-
spheres form a single monarchy, nation, and family, and that those [persons] whose
origins are from the overseas or European domains are equal in rights to those from
this peninsula.77 Titled Equality of Rights between European and Overseas Spaniards,
the decree of 15 October 1810 became the touchstone for American deputies in later
debates. When the peninsular majority refused to honor the decrees implications by
granting immediate equal representation based on total population, the action contributed
to a growing American recognition that their patrias standing was indeed that of
colonies.
Opinions differed on whether the three decrees reafrmed the Indies historic status or
represented a new stage in their relationship with Spain. Peruvian deputy Antonio Zuazo
maintained that the October 1810 decree reiterated the equal rights of Spaniards born in
either the Americas or Spain that the Crown had declared over three centuries earlier.78
His compatriot Vicente Morales Durez cited the Recopilacin, where it says that the
Americas are incorporated and united to the Crown of Castile. This means that the pro-
vinces of America neither have been nor are slaves or vassals of the provinces of Spain;
they have been and are as the provinces of Castile with the same privileges and
honors.79 Chilean deputy Joaqun Fernndez de Leyva also argued that from the Spa-
niards discovery and settlement in the Americas (and the Philippine Islands), the lands
were integral parts of the monarchy.80 Fray Servando de Mier of Mexico later concurred,
bristling that it was an insult to say that the Americas were ever colonies (Guerra 1813,
2:638n). Drawing heavily upon the French text of Alexander von Humboldts (18081811)
Political Essay on the Kingdom of New Spain, he noted that the kings of Spain and the
Indies have considered these possessions as integral parts of their monarchy rather
than as colonies in the sense associated with the word since the sixteenth century by
the commercial peoples of Europe. The monarchs had recognized their inability to rule
the mainland like the islands of the Antilles; force would fail. The result was more equi-
table legislation than that of other colonies (ibid., 2:630n).81 For these deputies and Fray
Servando, the compromise decree conrmed an ancient relationship.
Peninsular deputies, in contrast, regularly interpreted the 15 October decree as a new
beginning. Said one from Valencia, the Cortes had determined that all the dominions
were a single nation and their naturales should enjoy all rights equally.82 A deputy
from Murcia hailed the decree as sanctioning equality after three centuries of ministerial
persecution.83 An anonymous tract remarked that the madre patria is no longer the
stepmother of the Americans.84 Similarly, the Gazeta de Madrid reminded readers that
the kingdoms and provinces of Spanish America are no longer considered colonies,
but rather have an integral part in the representation in the cortes.85
Increased sensitivity conrmed awareness of the evolving political lexicon. In April
1811, Agustn de Argelles, one of the most prominent peninsular deputies, changed
the wording of a recommendation to the Cortes by substituting provinces of America
for colony and overseas commodities for colonial commodities. His reason: after
the decree of 15 October, there were neither colonies nor colonial commodities, for
Spain and America formed a single monarchy with absolute equality in rights.86 In the
same year an anonymous tract treated provinces and kingdoms of America as identical,
noting that the Spanish Americas are an integral part of the monarchy.87 Another 1811
publication commented that Spain had decreed equality with her legitimate sister[s] New
Spain and Spanish America, erasing from them the nicknames of conquest and colony
(Gonzlez y Montoya 1811, 56). The Gazeta de Madrid reminded readers that the king-
doms and provinces of Spanish America are no longer considered colonies, but rather
have an integral part in the representation in the cortes.88
Kingdoms and provinces in a world of colonies

The British considered all European possessions in the Americas to be colonies. Spanish
translators of British publications used a cognate for the English term, employing colo-
nias for colonies. The French word colonies, applied to Frances overseas possessions,
also became colonias in the Gazeta de Madrid. 89 Not surprisingly, residents in the United
States routinely referred to the Spanish colonies.90
In June 1812, the Gazeta de Madrid began its news from London with the progress that
the insurrections are making in the Spanish colonies.91 In August the Gaceta del Gobierno
de Mxico presented a British account that mentioned the insurrections of the Spanish
colonies.92 Such ubiquity made references to colonies routine, as Spanish writers and
foreign and domestic newspapers available to Spanish and American readers increasingly
employed the term. In a simple declarative sentence, a friar in 1812 wrote: We have lost
our colonies and eet (Vlez 1812, 59). Two years later, Ferdinand VIIs former tutor con-
sidered certain the separation and independence of all Spanish America, and its other
overseas colonies (Escoiquiz 1814, 37).
Reference to colonies also surfaced in the Cortes when it again discussed American
representation. Jos Mejia Lequerica, a deputy for Santa Fe de Bogot, interpreted penin-
sular opposition to allocating deputies on the basis of total population as treating the
Americas as colonies that did not exist for themselves, but only for the metropole.
Refusal to grant representation on this basis would mean the Americans still have to con-
sider themselves as true colonies.93 Councilor of the Indies Jos Pablo Valiente, a deputy
for Seville, on the other hand, claimed that the name Spanish colonies was neither given
nor applied to the provinces of the Indies.94 Jos Miguel Guridi Alcocer, deputy for Tlax-
cala, vented his frustration that labeling the Americas as colonias served to oppose their
equal representation with the peninsula. After outlining European colonies in the Amer-
icas, he observed that Spanish writers had always distinguished their own settlements from
their rivals colonies for the former sought friendship and trade and to propagate the
Catholic religion rather than being entities of oppression and injustice.95 In Guridis
view, the word colonies could be shorthand for inferior standing, for dependency on
the metropolis, for an excuse to deny the Americas the equal rights promised in the
decrees of 22 January 1809, 14 February 1810, and 15 October 1810.
Although the General and Extraordinary Cortes approved equality of representation
almost unanimously on 7 February 1811, the American deputies and their peninsular
allies lost by a vote of 69 to 61 their goal of applying the principle to the congress
through immediate elections.96 Frustrated Americans appreciated the clear implication
that a majority of the Cortes, albeit slight, wanted to treat their patrias as colonies
without formally employing the term.
The Constitution (1812) that the Cortes formally approved on 19 March testied to the
paper victory of administrative uniformity within the territory of the Spains.97 No
mention of either kingdoms (plural) or colonies appeared in its 384 articles. Pride of ter-
ritorial label went to province in both its singular and plural forms. Overseas rather than
Indies identied location, e.g., provincias de ultramar. Americans, however, could only
read the careful, racially based denition of Spanish citizen (using ciudadano rather than
vecino, the traditional term for a municipalitys citizen), as a way of perpetuating penin-
sular control of the Cortesat least for the eight-year period during which the
Constitution prohibited any amendment.98 Thus in political terms, the charter implicitly
sanctioned treating the newly dened overseas provinces as colonies, despite the earlier
declaration of equality. As if to remind readers of status lost, several American signatories
identied themselves by kingdomNew Kingdom of Galicia, New Kingdom of Granada,
Kingdom of New Vizcaya, and Kingdom of Peru. A handful of peninsular deputies signed
in similar fashion, identifying themselves as representing: Kingdom of Murcia, Kingdom
of Jan, Kingdom of Galicia, and Kingdom of Granada.
The Council of Castile blew the cover off the Constitutions careful linguistic omission.
In a congratulatory statement honoring the new charter, it included among the docu-
ments accomplishments: making uniform the interest of the Colonies with the Metro-
pole.99 After repeated emphasis on equality since 1809, this reference to Colonies
could only encourage Americans to think what a Colombian historian, Jos Manuel
Restrepo, articulated in 1827: the promised equality was reduced to words and
pompous expressions capable of deceiving only children.
Colonies as a term of deprecation

Castilian-language publications in London provided news of Spain and the Americas to
readers in both. Starting in 1810, Jos Blanco Whites El Espaol offered political commen-
tary, documents, and translated English and French materials. The rst number noted the
unhappy administration of the Austrian monarchs and the ills that occasioned the estab-
lishment of the French family [Bourbons] on the Spanish throne.100 Reference to three
centuries of these dynasties combined rule became routine, shorthand for despotic gov-
ernment usually dated from Charles Is victory over the comuneros in 1521 to the end of
Charles IVs widely disparaged reign in 1808. Manuel Josef Quintana (1810) also issued a
tract avowing that since arbitrary power demolished the nations liberty three centuries
earlier, Spaniards had been the playthings of a capricious will of one personan ambi-
tious and greedy monarch or his representatives, in other words, a despot.101 Liberal
peninsular deputy Agustn de Argelles summarized: three centuries of misfortunes (des-
gracias), three centuries of despotism, three centuries of systematic oppression.102
Conveniently, critics of Spanish rule in the Indies could apply the same shorthand. For
three centuries the Americas have been the object of the greed and rapacity of the Eur-
opeans sent to rule them103 and suffered oppression, servitude, and injustices; they
were the victim of disorder, corruption, and conquest (Roscio 1811, 1). These centuries
of los Carlos y los Felipes, of despotism and oppression, exactly [matched] those of the
discovery and domination of America and its injustices.104 A deputy for the Viceroyalty
of Ro de la Plata, Francisco Lpez de Lisperguer, identied both Spain and its distant pos-
sessions as submerged in ignorance and the object of a tyranny since the time of discov-
ery.105 Or as deputy Inca Dionisio Yupanqui stated, Napoleon was punishing Spain in the
same way that for three centuries Spain had punished her innocent brothers in
America.106
Three centuries of despotism thus translated to 300 years of Spanish rule in the Amer-
icas. By the early 1810s an equation had emerged: colonies equaled despotism equaled
Spanish rule in America equaled three hundred years of degradation, oppression, and ser-
vitude. In political discussions, each term implied the others; together they served to justify
the pursuit of independence (see Guerra 2000, 7273). The Congress of Chilpancingo in
Mexico issued a manifesto in 1813 that employed colonists as it damned the rigors of
tyranny, three centuries of slavery, and the monopoly of the metropole.107 In the
same year, a Chilean Catechism of the Patriots asked what system of government was
the worst. The answer: the colonial system. Why? Because it conicted with the liberty
of the people; because experience showed that people are poorly governed from an
immense distance; because of maladministration of justice; and because the countrys pro-
ducts and riches were consumed not for its benet but to support war, luxury, and vices of
the court.108
Ferdinand VII returns to Spain

In 1814 Ferdinand VII restored the institutions present in May 1808 and recycled some
pre-1808 language. More public use of the term colonies in legislation signaled a
change since the reign of Charles IV. For example, the Minister of Hacienda referred to
our colonies in a royal order in 1816.109 An earlier decree had included the self-
pitying phrase colonies of this vast monarchy, once opulent, strong, and envied.110
During the monarchs reign, publications outside of Spain continued to identify and
condemn the colonial status of its American possessions. Venezuelan patriot Manuel
Palacio Fajardos (1817) Outline of the Revolution in Spanish America noted Spains des-
potic rule in the Indies.111 Deprived of its rights for more than three ages [three centuries]
and subjected to long and painful slavery, America should not be dependent on, and
subject to a small peninsula in the European continent.112 In other words, it should
not be a colony.
The aristocratic French cleric, opportunist, and pundit Abb de Pradts (1817) two-
volume work entitled On Colonies (De las colonias) carried a secondary title of the
present revolution in America. Its publication sparked reviews and commentaries that
inevitably used colonies, e.g., Spanish colonies, those colonies, her colonies. An Amer-
ican commentator remarked that all European countries had followed the Spanish
example of wanting colonies to be dependent on the metropole, desiring to be the only
beneciary of their existence, and seeking to keep foreigners out.113 U.S. agents sent to
Spanish America routinely applied colonies to Spains possessions. In a set of reports
to President James Monroe,114 they repeatedly associated the term with perceived mala-
dies of Spanish rule, e.g., evils in the administration, three hundred years of slavery, des-
potic deprivation.115
Although the notion went back at least to the mid-eighteenth century and Anne-
Robert-Jacques Turgots famous dictum that Colonies are like fruits which cling to the
tree only till they ripen, forecasts of colonies becoming independent increased.116 Peru-
vian cleric Melchor de Talamantes ([1808], 1849) argued that separation from the metro-
pole was legitimate when colonies are able to go it alone.117 The Gazeta Ministerial de
Chile in 1819 referred to the colonial question and the great interest in it, noting a
widely held view that at some point all colonies would inevitably separate from their
metropolis.118 This prediction could only encourage advocates of independence to
describe their regions past experience as colonial. Contemporaries used an analogy to
human aging and maturity. When children grew up, they would leave the family. In the
words of Abb de Pradt, Independence is innate in colonies, as [is] the separation of
families. It is nothing more than a declaration of their coming of age.119 To quote
William Waltons (1814) Expos on the Dissentions of Spanish America, The rise, if not the
independence of Spanish America, is one of those inevitable events, against which, human
wisdom would in vain attempt to prevent (p. 453).
From colonies to coloniaje

With independence, writers embraced the idea that the colonial era aptly encapsulated
three centuries of Spanish rule. Routinely they replaced kingdoms and provinces with
colonies when referring to Spains former mainland possessions. During the Liberal tri-
ennium of the early 1820s, speakers in the Cortes also used colonies repeatedly.120
Mention of Santo Domingo elicited the rst colony of Spaniards and that colony.121
A reporter remarked that a poem by Josef Mor de Fuentes was essentially Spanish, for
it only refers to the peninsula and to our colonies.122 The Gaceta del Gobierno
(Madrid) in early 1821 noted that U.S. President James Monroes message to Congress
on 16 November 1820 included the statement that the war between Spain and her colonies
continues .123 Soon afterward, it summarized a story from Philadelphia that referred to
Spains authorities opposing the independence of the colonies.124
In Mexico, Agustn de Iturbides proclamation of independence in 1821 asserted the
end of dependence on Spain or any other nation.125 Several years later, however, an
article raised a troublesome question: what had occurred in England, France, Spain, and
nally in all those former Spanish colonies that were now independent nations of
America? The answer: a people that has lived under an oppressive regimen does not
believe it is free by breaking the chains that had yoked it to the cart of the despot.126
In his Memoria poltico-instructivo of 1821, Servando Mier suggested that Ferdinand
VII could say, My colonial system is admirably calculated to perpetuate the humiliating
slavery of the Americas.127
Although a newspaper informing Chileans of Limas declaration of independence in
1821 did not use colonial, its meaning permeated an article afrming that, in Perus
prior state of slavery, one could not imagine it would ever exercise of the rights of a
free and independent people. But three centuries of lethargy in the chains of a despotic
government had ended. Peru was independent of domination by Spain or any other
foreign state.128
Bernardo OHiggins in July 1822 spoke of the need to erase forever institutions
mounted under a colonial plan. His vice president remarked soon afterward on Americas
three centuries of slavery.129 In the same year, a peninsular deputy to the Cortes in
Madrid declared: Everyone knows the difference between a country (pas) that is a
colony and [one] that is an integral part of the territory of a nation. Until the publication
of the Constitution [1812] the Spanish nation treated and possessed the countries of ultra-
mar as colonies.130
By the 1820s, in short, reference to Spains America as colonies was customary, not
least because it explained how Spanish rule had legitimated independence. In Mexico
Carlos Mara Bustamante (1828) happily noted the reduction to dust of the chains of ser-
vitude that oppressed America for three centuries. Colonial submission was over (Bus-
tamente 1828, 18687). Colombian Jos Manuel Restrepo (1827) avowed that Spain had
ruled colonias espaolas and burdened comercio colonial (Restrepo 1827, 11). Another
history of Colombia characterized the Spanish presence as the colonial regime before
embarking on a discussion of the emancipation of the Spanish colonies (Lallement 1827,

64, 67, 68). An anonymous author in 1830 referred to the abject colonists prior to inde-
pendence in Venezuela, Cundinamarca, and Quito. As colonies of Spain, they were under
the yoke of foreign domination (Tierrarme 1830, 4). Another commentator asserted
that Peru and Bolivias difculty in creating a stable political system based on law resulted
from both inexperience with a new form of government and su antiguo ser colonial
(Ensayo 1827, 89).
It remained only to invent a term that would encapsulate Spains lengthy rule in the
Americas. Coloniaje lled this need.131 The word appeared in Limas La Abeja republicana
in 1822. The Peruvian government employed it in 1825 in a reference to getting rid of (des-
terrndose) the defects of the colonial era and the fatal slavery that accompanied it.132 In
1828 the Gaceta de Colombia published a Peruvian generals avowal that his army refused
to live with the opprobrium of a new colonial era [coloniaje].133 Jos Victorino Lastarria
used coloniaje repeatedly in an 1844 memoria entitled On the Social Inuence of the Con-
quest and Colonial System of the Spaniards in Chile.134 No later than the 1850s, coloniaje
began to appear in book titles.135 Authors continue to employ it; for example, a work
entitled Perspectivas sobre el coloniaje appeared in 2013.136
Conclusion
For most of their existence, Spains most prominent mainland possessions in the Americas
bore the title kingdomsnotably, Kingdom of New Spain, Kingdom of Peru, and New
Kingdom of Granada. While contemporaries also recognized some territorial units as pro-
vinces, the more impressive term peppered ofcial documents and took its place promi-
nently in the 1681 Compilation of the Laws of the Kingdoms of the Indies. For more than
two centuries, Spaniards in both Iberia and the Americas believed the appellation colo-
nies did not reect the almost studiously ambiguous regal relationship between the
Crown of Castile and its domains in the western hemisphere (see Pagden 1987, 64). But
whether the Kingdom of the Indies had joined the Crown through integration or aggre-
gation was beside the point, for the Crown could add a kingdom by either means (ibid.,
5165; see also, Elliott 2006, 11922; Mazn Gmez 2012, 28).
In contrast to Spains American kingdoms, its rivalsEngland, France, the United
Provinces, and Portugalinsisted that both their own and Spains possessions in the
western hemisphere were colonies.137 The mercantilist implication of a colonial
relationship between the mother country and her colonies rested on protected and
restricted Atlantic trade. By the 1760s, some aspiring ministers in the court of Charles
III started to emphasize the economic signicance to England and France of restricted
trade and imported and taxed colonial staples, e.g., sugar, tobacco. At the same time,
the ofcial Gazeta de Madrid was routinely publishing accounts from London and Paris
newspapers that referred to British and French colonies. Works by foreign historians
and political economists added support for this modern use of an ancient term.
Eager to emulate British success, some peninsular Spaniards adopted colonies as the
American side of a redesigned, explicitly dependent relationship between the Crown
and its American possessions. The approach featured uniformity in administrative insti-
tutions and most territorial units (notably provinces or intendancies), a greater reliance
on permanent garrisons and a reorganized militia, a trans-Atlantic commercial system
open to numerous Spanish and American ports, expanded mining production, and
increased royal revenue. Additionally, it sought to reduce if not eliminate negotiation
between local elites in the Indies and royal administrators in the Americas and at court.
Efforts to implement this redenitionand thereby turn kingdoms into coloniescom-
prised the content of legislation designed to bolster the royal treasury despite Charles IIIs
advocacy for union and equality. But the attempt largely failed. The cauldron of inter-
national conict stirred by the French Revolution disrupted the expanded trading
system, eliminated scal solvency, and, in its Napoleonic phase, created an unprecedented
political crisis that shocked Spain and stimulated its New World possessions rst to pursue
political autonomy and ultimately to embrace complete independence.
Aside from occasional mentions, not until the 1760s did Spanish authors refer to their
monarchs dominions in the Indies as colonies. Widespread usage emerged only with
Spains political crisis in 1808 and the subsequent autonomist and independence move-
ments in the Americas. In Iberia, the Junta Centrals proclamation of 22 January 1809
in effect identied reference to Spains America as colonies as politically incorrect;
later governments of resistance rarely employed a term that was fast becoming an
insult. Indeed the Regencys 14 February 1810 call for the election of American deputies
to the Cortes denied that the Indies were or had been colonies. The Cortes adoption of
the 15 October 1810 declaration of equality formally endorsed the existence of a single
monarchy with dominions in two hemispheresa single nation, and a single family.
While the statement mentioned Spanish dominions and overseas paises, it made no
reference to colonies.
Yet early nineteenth-century peninsulars and a growing number of native sons and
other creoles read the past differentlycolonies had indeed existed. Moreover, for
many Americans, the Cortes of Cdizs refusal in 1811 to allow immediate representation
of the Indies based on total population conrmed that the peninsular majority wanted an
America that was politically dependent on Spaina colony.138
Scholars persistent use of colonies perpetuates a widespread failure to appreciate,
let alone emphasize, that native sons and other creoles in Spains American possessions
routinely referred to their patrias as kingdoms. It is time to credit the conquistadors,
early settlers, later arrivals, and their descendants in the Indies with knowing what they
were doing when they largely shunned colonies, a word associated almost exclusively
with non-Spanish possessions in the western hemisphere for more than two centuries.
One alternative is Spains America; this phrase characterizes their general view of the
Indies before 18081811 with greater neutrality and more accuracy than the conventional
Colonial Spanish America.
Notes
1. While recognizing they are anachronisms, I employ Spain as shorthand for the multiplicity
of realms that comprised the Crowns of Castile and Aragon; Spaniards for their peoples;
and, similarly, Spanish monarchs for the rulers of what became known as the Spanish
Monarchy.
2. After dening colonialism as foreign intrusion or domination, a historian recently listed a
dozen types. Shoemaker 2015, 2930.
3. The authors argument is considerably more sophisticated than this mention suggests.
4. The application of provinces as a generic term appeared by the early sixteenth century and
both dominions and kingdoms and provinces served as synonyms for the Indies. This
article subsumes provinces in references to kingdoms and deals only with Spains mainland
possessions.
5. Brazil was briey an exception in the early nineteenth century. Native sons refers to Amer-
ican-born Spaniards (creoles) in the context of their patria, e.g., the Kingdom of Peru or
Audiencia of Lima.
6. Occasionally authors employ the singular form, Kingdom of the Indies. For example, Juan
de Solrzano did so in arguing that the Crown of Castile incorporated it in 1492 (Mazn
Gmez 2012, 3435).
7. Coleccin de los tratados, 1796, 447. https://books.google.com/books?id=XJgNAAAAQAA
J&pg=PA453&dq=Carlos+IV+Rey+de+Espaa&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCQQ6AEwATgyah
UKEwix5YfFs-rHAhVKN4gKHXJEC0I#v=onepage&q=Carlos%20IV%20Rey%20de%
20Espaa&f=false (accessed 9-11-2015).
8. One can nd use of provinces, dominions, possessions, and territories, among other
terms, but these lack the specicity of kingdoms and colonies.
9. Constitucin poltica 1812, Art. 61 among others.
10. http://es.wikisource.org/wiki/Testamento_de_Isabel_la_Catlica (accessed 6-08-2013).
11. Recopilacin 1681, lib. III, tt. I, ley I.
12. descubiertas y por descubrir (Fernndez lvarez 1979, 33). A postscript claimed any other
lands discovered in the Ocean Sea.
13. http://www.biblioteca.tv/artman2/publish/1520_277/Segunda_Carta_de_Relaci_n_de_Hern_
n_Cort_s_459.shtml (accessed 9-16-2014).
14. Another example is a reference to los dilatados reinos de la Nueva Espaa, del Per y en
muchas de sus recnditas provincias in Gumilla 1745, 53.
15. http://constitucionweb.blogspot.com/2012/02/tratado-de-paris-1763.html (accessed 9-18-
2014).
16. Coleccin de los tratados 1796, 177, 210.
17. E.g., a manual on writing letters published in 1808 (Begas 1808, 1920). The Crown also
employed provinces of Peru, as in 1580, 1684, and 1783 cdulas referring to the viceroy
of them: see Gobernantes del Peru 1925, 6; Echave y Assu 1688,148; Ordenanza 1803,
nm. 14. Ferdinand VII issued reglamentos in August 1814 that referred to the Reino de
Nueva Espaa, Reino de Guatemala, Reino del Per, Reino de Tierra-rme (Decretos 1816,
157).
18. Coleccin de las reales cdulas 1815, 249: pragmatic sanction issued by Reina Gobernadora, 6
October 1833.
19. A magisterial comparison of the English and Spanish possessions in the Americas is Elliott
2006.
20. See also Humboldt (1966, 4, 7), who used both colonias and reino de Nueva Espaa.
21. Child considered New England the most prejudicial Plantation to England precisely because
it produced the same types of commodities, e.g., corn, cattle, sh; raised seamen; and engaged
in competitive shipping and skirted paying duty in England (ibid., 21215).
22. The reasons Child offered: Spain followed the same civil and ecclesiastical policies in its plan-
tations as it did at home; shipping was expensive and interest was high; Spaniards focused on
the production of gold and silver rather than cultivating commodities for export; and Catho-
lic clerics were prohibited from marrying.
23. Gee (1753, 276) refers to Spains colonies.
24. The Crown applied the term to the Colonia de Santander established in the mid-18th century
on the Gulf coast of New Spain; to the Colonia de Floridablanca in Patagonia, founded in the
1780s; and to the new towns of Sierra Morena in Andalusia in the 1760s.
25. An early example appeared on 29 August 1702.
26. Gazeta de Madrid, 27 November 1764.
27. Gazeta de Madrid, 19 March 1765.
28. Gazeta de Madrid, 8 April 1766.
29. Ireland has also been described as an English colony. See Canny 1988.
30. Gazeta de Madrid, 10 September 1776.
31. Gazeta de Madrid, 25 June 1779.
32. Gazeta de Madrid, 25 February 1783.
33. On the importance of emulation, see Paquette 2008, esp. 47, 3036.
34. This work provides the Discurso y reexiones de un vasallo sobre la decadencia de nuestras
Indias Espaolas, probably written in 1760, as an appendix.
35. The closest he came was employing the pronoun ours in Portuguese colonies adjacent to
ours.
36. Glvezs instructions for the general visitation of New Spain referred to Kingdom of New
Spain and kingdoms and provinces of New Spain. See Priestley 1916, 404, 413.
37. Informe y plan de intendencias para el reino de Nueva Espaa (January 1768) by Visitor
D. Jos de Glvez and the Viceroy Marqus de Croix (in Navarro Garca 1959, 173).
38. Campomanes was a scal and later governor of the Council of Castile. Pagden (1995a, 330)
emphasizes the centrality of Pedro Rodrguez de Campomanes in the shift and notes the min-
ister acknowledged his debt to publications by Josiah Child and Montesquieu on his use of
colonies rather than kingdoms of the Indies. See Rodrguez Campomanes 1988, 359. See
also Pagden 1995b, 123.
39. Lemprire 2004, para 24: While in 1570 the establishments in the Indies were more colonies
than kingdoms, in 1770 and beyond they were more kingdoms than colonies.
40. The title page claims that Ward wrote the work in 1762. The rst of multiple printings was in
1779.
41. For doubts on Campillos authorship, see Navarro Garca 1983 and 1995.
42. Campillo y Coso 1789, 26465 on public women.
43. Floridablanca 1790, 12; Jovellanos 1859, 7176 emphasized colonies.
44. Quoted in Barbier 1978, 88: aruinarse estos paises de donde queremos sacar el jugo. The
issue had to do with repartimientos and subdelegaciones.
45. In the aftermath of the American Revolution, Conde de Aranda, ambassador to France,
allegedly reviewed persistent problems in what he called the colonies and articulated his
belief that, when a favorable opportunity arose, they would aspire to independence.
46. Mercurio peruano, 31 March 1791, 242.
47. The Spanish letrado and geographer Isidoro de Antilln also employed colonias, e.g., in
1808, 5, 40, 43, 53 and in a book title in 1811.
48. Reglamento 1778, 48 for reference to Louisiana. Pages 2 and 3 mention Reynos de Santa F y
Goatemala (sic) and Reynos de Chile y el Per.
49. Decreto creando dos Secretaras de Estado y del Despacho de Indias, 8 July 1787.
50. The texts of the reales cdulas are available at http://biblio.juridicas.unam.mx/libros/libro.
htm?l=19 (accessed 1-28-2015). They are appendices in Cruz Barney 2001, 111302. The
consulados were Caracas, Guatemala, Buenos Aires, Havana, Veracruz, Santiago de Chile,
Guadalajara, and Cartagena de Indias. The term sugar colonies appears in the Sugar Act
of 1764. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/sugar_act_1764.asp (accessed 1-28-2015).
51. Exposiciones 1808. http://www.pim.unam.mx/catalogos/hyd/HYDI/HYDI260.pdf. (accessed
1-29-2015).
52. Mientras exista una mula tuerta manchega en Espaa, sta deber dominar a los mejicanos.
Attribution to Guillermo de Aguirre in Stein and Stein 2015, 216. Numerous writers attrib-
uted this or a similar comment to Miguel de Bataller y Ros. He receives credit in 1829 in the
translation, so long as there was a Manchegan mule or Castilian cobbler in New Spain, no
Creole was t to govern it. The Foreign Quarterly Review 1829, 196.
53. Gazeta de Madrid, 20 May 1808, 48384; if a French ofcial drafted the document, the use of
colonies would be expected.
54. Response by the Junta Suprema de Castilla y Len to a circular from the Junta Suprema of
Valencia concerning the creation of a Junta Central. In Maniesto 1809, 191.
55. Rico Linage 1999, 118; Actas [1808] 1874, 114; Ortega 2011, 24.
56. Real Provisin 1808. http://www.cervantesvirtual.com/servlet/SirveObras/c1812/

02585085490270673089079/p0000001.htm#I_2_ (accessed 10-02-2014).
57. Montesquieu [1748], 37273 had commented: The Indies and Spain are two powers under
the same master; but the Indies are the principal, while Spain is only an accessory. It is in vain
for politics to attempt to bring back the principal to the accessory; the Indies will always draw
Spain to themselves.
58. Moreno 1809, 13: http://es.wikisource.org/wiki/Representacin_de_los_hacendados
(accessed 11-09-2014).
59. Terming the election of a deputy to serve on the Junta the most interesting [election] for this
kingdom in nearly three centuries, the city fathers complained, however, that they could not
participate in the election of a candidate for it was not the capital of an intendancy. Repre-
sentacin de la ciudad de Quertaro 1809: http://www.biblioweb.dgsca.unam.mx/
dublanylozano/ (accessed 11-04-2014).
60. Gaceta de Caracas, 7 April 1809: Los bellos dias de la America comienzan en la epoca de esta
rden memorable.
61. Catesismo 1810: http://www.memoriachilena.cl/archivos2/pdfs/MC0008890.pdf (accessed
11-09-2014).
62. El Espaol, 30 July 1810, 287, 319.
63. Flrez Estrada 1811, 9, 27. He uses Espaa, y sus Amricas.
64. Gazeta del gobierno, 3 March 1809, 181.
65. Gazeta del gobierno, 2 September 1809, 119.
66. Gazeta del gobierno, 12 December 1809, 548.
67. Gazeta del gobierno, 4 January 1810, 13.
68. Gazeta Extraordinaria de la Regencia de Espaa Indias (May 17, 1810).
69. For example, see Antilln 1811, 5; Moreno, 1812, 198. https://books.google.com/books?id=
j6hWAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA198&dq=yugo+colonias&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CFQQ6AEwCGoV
ChMI8dHhy8eXyAIVRpaICh1MNAVO#v=onepage&q=yugo%20colonias&f=false (accessed 9-
28-2015).
70. The document was published in Gazeta del gobierno de Mexico, tomo 1, No. 56, 18 May 1810.
71. El Espaol, vol. 2, 235.
72. Diario 1811, 10, 12. European deputies protested that no one opposed the fraternity of the
overseas domains with those of Europe, but the time was not right to consider the proposal.
The perceived need for a new statement of equality probably reected recognition that, fol-
lowing the Cortes claim of sovereignty and legitimacy, a legislative tabula rasa existed.
Additionally, the questioned legitimacy of the Regency and the historic practice of monarchs
conrming their predecessors actions argued for an explicit conrmation of equality.
73. Ibid., 24.
74. Autos Secretos 1810, Sessions of 3 and 9 October.
75. Ibid., Session of 10 October 1810.
76. Ibid., Session of 11 October 1810; King 1953 analyzed the debate over equality.
77. Ibid., Sessions of 14 and 15 October 1810; Decree of 15 October 1810. Translation in Cowans
2003, 15.
78. Diario, 11 January 1811, 355.
79. Ibid., 370; ley 1, ttulo 1, libro III.
80. Diario, 16 January 1811, 427.
81. See Humboldt 1966, 4. 7. Humboldt used colonies and reino de Nueva Espaa.
82. Diario de las Cortes, session of 11 January 1811, 359: Francisco Xavier Borrull y Vilanova.
83. Ibid., 365: Alfonso Rovira y Glvez.
84. Breve discurso 1811, 5, 7, 8; Jos Canga Argelles (D.J.C.A. 1811, 113, 139) noted that now the
European and American sons of the Provinces that comprise the State or Spanish Monarchy
would join together. The imperial constitution to be written would unite Spain and the colo-
nies or overseas provinces in a single Nation under a single set of laws.
85. Gazeta de Madrid, 30 July 1812, 854.
86. Diario, 4 April 1811, 463.
87. Breve discurso 1811, 5, 7, 8.

88. Gazeta de Madrid, 30 July 1812, 854.
89. Gazeta de Madrid, 27 May 1803, 436; 20 May 1803, 410.
90. Gazeta de Madrid, 27 November 1810, 1484, reprinting news taken from the New York
newspaper the General Advertiser of 18 June 1810.
91. Gazeta de Madrid, 18 June 1812, 688.
92. Gaceta del Gobierno de Mexico, tomo 3, no. 278, 25 August 1812, 89394.
93. Diario, 18 January 1811, 1314.
94. Ibid., 23 January 1811, 7172.
95. Diario, 25 January 1811, 9798.
96. Diario, 7 February 1811, 290. I thank Jaime E. Rodrguez O. for calling my attention to the
vote for equality. See Rodrguez 2008.
97. Title II.
98. Article 375. The racial basis appeared in Article 18 in the guise of geographic origin with only
Europe and America acceptable, save in special cases.
99. El Supremo Consejo de Castilla, 22 March 1812, in Representacin [1814] 1820, 289.
100. El Espaol, 30 April 1810, 8. This was the inaugural issue.
101. Quintana 1810, 3. A political catechism dened despotic government and identied those it
ruled: One in which the legislative, executive, and judicial powers are combined in a single
person with no law other than his caprice; as a result, subjects of this government enjoy no
rights; for this reason it is said that they are slaves (Catecismo 1810, 1011). A subsequent
author added vicious and unjust as characteristics of despotism (D.J.C. 1812, 32).
102. Ibid., Session of 9 January 1811, 323.
103. Diario, 11 January 1811, 359: Francisco Xavier Borull.
104. Diario, 11 January 1811, 371: Vicente Morales y Duarez.
105. Diario de las discusiones 1811, 325, session of 9 January. Francisco Lpez de Lisperguer
(Buenos Aires) was a substitute deputy for the Viceroyalty of Ro de la Plata.
106. Ibid., Session of 16 December 1810, 5.
107. Mendibil 1828, 38889. This work is taken from Carlos Mara Bustamantes Cuadro
histrico.
108. The Catechism was published in eight issues of the Monitor Araucano beginning in Novem-
ber 1813. http:///www.auroradechile.cl/newtenberg/681/printer-2379.html (accessed 11-09-
2014).
109. Real orden, 1 November 1816, in Apndice 1819, 213.
110. colonias de esta vasta monarquia, antes opulenta, fuerte y envidiada. Real decreto para el
establicimiento del sistema general de Hacienda, in Coleccion de las reales cdulas1815,
30633.
111. http://www.pdv.com/lexico/pioneros/palacio.htm (accessed 8-24-2014).
112. Ibid., 4647, 51.
113. Observaciones de un americano sobre las obras de Mr. de Pradt acerca del estado actual de
Amrica, Mercurio de Espaa 1818, 35163.
114. The reports are included in Message 1818, 17 November.
115. Ibid., Report of Theodorick Bland, 45.
116. Gazeta Ministerial de Chile 1819, 15 May.
117. Cuando las colonias se bastan s mismas. Talamantes [1808] 1849, 56.
118. Ibid.
119. declaracion de su mayor edad. Pradt 1817, 1:190.
120. Diario de las Cortes 1820, 1:34041. A merchant of Santander, for example, presented the
body with an article from the Semanario Cantabro that referred to our colonies.
121. Diario, VI, 229.
122. Gaceta del Gobierno, 4 December 1820, 722.
123. Gaceta del Gobierno, 9 January 1821, 37.
124. Gaceta del Gobierno, 15 February 1821, 215.
125. Proclama del Excmo. Seor Don Agustin de Iturbide, 24 February 1821, 3.
126. El Observador de la Repblica Mexicana, 20 June 1827, 5758.

127. El fanal 1822, 1:3.
128. Gazeta ministerial extraordinaria de Chile 1821, 15 August.
129. Gazeta ministerial de Chile, 1822, 25 July.
130. Diario de las Sesiones de Cortes 1822, Session of 13 February 1822, 2306307.
131. In 1823 the prospectus appeared in London for La Biblioteca Americana o Miscelnea de Lit-
eratura, Artes y Ciencias. Representing A Society of Americans its author, Juan Garca del
Ro of Cartagena de Indias, divided the anticipated articles on American history into three
eras: ancient (through the Spanish conquest), the middle period (edad media) or colonial
epoch (marked by Spains divide and rule philosophy and maintaining society in ignorance),
and modern history (independent states). Published in London by G. Marchant, 1823, vivii.
The three principal authors were Garca del Ro, Andrs de Bello, and Pedro Creuzer (Pardo
1973, 405).
132. los vicios del coloniaje, y de la fatal esclavitud que trajo consigo. Order of the Consejo de
Gobierno, Lima, 6 October 1825, in Coleccion de leyes 1832, 2:165.
133. General Agustn de Gamarra. Gaceta de Colombia 1828, 21 September.
134. Anales 1846, 246, 256.
135. Barra 1857 and Memorias 1859. The simple phrase El coloniaje appeared as the title of a
book by Gmez, 1861.
136. Authored by Constanza Acua Faria.
137. Or, for England, in some cases its synonym of plantations.
138. A declining number of observers continued to maintain that Spains America possessions
neither were nor ever had been colonies because integration into the Crown of Castile con-
rmed their status as kingdoms.
Acknowledgements
The author presented an early version of this article at the 2015 meeting of the Rocky Mountain
Council on Latin American Studies, Tucson, Arizona. He thanks Jaime E. Rodrguez O., Lyman
L. Johnson, Christoph Rosenmller, Douglas Catterall, the editor, and two anonymous readers
for this journal for their thoughtful comments as the article took shape. Responsibility for remain-
ing errors and omissions is the authors alone.
Notes on contributor
Mark A. Burkholder is Founders Professor of History at the University of Missouri-St. Louis.
Among his publications are several articles in the Hispanic American Historical Review, mono-
graphs, reference works, and a textbook. These include: From impotence to authority: The
Spanish Crown and the American Audiencias, 16871808 (co-author D. S. Chandler, 1977); Politics
of a colonial career: Jos Baqujano and the Audiencia of Lima (1980); Biographical dictionary of
councilors of the Indies, 17171808 (1986); Spaniards in the colonial empire: Creoles vs. Peninsulars?
(2013); and Colonial Latin America, 9th ed. (co-author Lyman L. Johnson, 2015). He is completing
a short history of Latin America from Columbus to Chaves with Professor Monica Rankin, Univer-
sity of Texas, Dallas.
References
Actas de la Diputacin General de Espaoles que se junt en Bayona el 15 de junio de 1808. 1874.
Madrid: J.A. Garca.
Acua Faria, Constanza, ed. 2013. Sobre el coloniaje. Santiago de Chile: Ediciones Universidad
Alberto Hurtado.
Almarza Villalobos, ngel Rafael, and Armando Martnez Garnica, eds. 2008. Instrucciones para los
diputados del Nuevo Reino de Granada y Venezuela ante la Junta Central Gubernativa de Espaa
y las Indias. Bucaramanga: Universidad Industrial de Santander.
Alvarez, Francisco. 1778. Noticia del establecimiento y poblacin de las colonias inglesas en la
America septentrional. Madrid: Antonio Fernndez.
Anales de la Universidad de Chile, correspondientes al ao de 1843 al de 1844. 1846. Santiago de
Chile: Imprenta del Siglo.
Anon. 1811. Breve discurso muy util en las circunstancias actuales de Europa. Cadiz: Imprenta
Tormentaria.
Antilln, Isidoro de. 1811. Disertacin sobre el origen de la esclavitud de los negros, motivos que la
han perpetuado: Ventajas que se la atribuyen y medios que podrian adaptarse para hacer pros-
perar nuestras colonias sin la esclavitud de los negros. Palma de Mallorca: Miguel Domingo.
. 1808. Elementos de la geografa astronmica, natural y poltica de Espaa y Portugal. Madrid:
Fuentenebro y Compaa.
. 1806. Lecciones de geografa astronmica natural y poltica. Tomo 2. Madrid: Imprenta Real.
Antnez y Acevedo, Rafael. 1797. Memorias histricas sobre la legislacion, y gobierno del comercio de
los espaoles con sus Colonias en las Indias Occidentales. Madrid: Sancha.
Apndice a los tomos I, II, III y IV de la obra Decretos del Rey D. Fernando VII. 1819. Madrid:
Imprenta Real.
Armitage, David. 2007. The Declaration of Independence. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University
Press.
Autos secretos de las Cortes. 1810.
[Baqujano y Carrillo, Jos de]. 1791. Continuacin de la disertacin histrica y poltica sobre el
Comercio del Per. In Mercurio peruano. Tomo 1 (26): 23742.
Barbier, Jacques A. 1978. Jacques Barbiers reply. Hispanic American Historical Review 58 (1):
8790.
Barra, Jos Miguel de la. 1858. Compendio de la historia del coloniaje e independencia de Amrica.
Santiago: Chilena.
Begas, J. Antonio D. Y. 1808. Nuevo estilo y formulario de escribir cartas misivas, y responder a ellas.
Barcelona: Consortes Sierra y Mart.
Blanco White, Jos. 1810. El Espaol. [London].
Brackenridge, Henry M. 1819. Voyage to South America. 2 vols. Baltimore: The author.
Breve discurso muy util en las circunstancias actuales de Europa. 1811. Cadiz: Imprenta
Tormentaria.
Bustamante, Carlos Mara de. 1823. Cuadro histrico de la revolucin mexicana. Tomo 1. Mexico
City: Imprenta del Aguila.
. 1828. Campaas del General D. Felix Mara Calleja. Mexico City: Imprenta del Aguila.
Campillo y Coso, Jos del. 1789. Nuevo sistema de gobierno econmico para la Amrica. Madrid:
Benito Cano.
Canny, Nicholas. 1988. Kingdom and colony: Ireland in the Atlantic World, 15601800. Baltimore:
The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Casas, Bartolom de las. 1552. Brevsima relacin de la destruycin de las Indias. Seville: Sebastin
Trugillo.
Catesismo politico christiano. 1810. Santiago de Chile. http://www.memoriachilena.cl/archivos2/
pdfs/MC0008890.pdf (accessed 11-09-2014).
Catecismo politico para instruccion del pueblo espaol. 1810. Cadiz: Imprenta Real.
Child, Josiah. 1698. A new discourse of trade. London: T. Sowle.
Coleccion de leyes, decretos y ordenes publicadas en el Peru desde su independencia en el ao de 1821,
hasta 31 de diciembre de 1830. 1832. Tomo 2. Lima: Jos Masias.
Coleccion de las reales cdulas, decretos y ordenes de su magestad el Seor Don Fernando VII, desde 4
de mayo de 1814. 1815. Vol. 2. Valencia: Estevan.
Coleccin de los tratados de paz, alianza, comercio &c. 1796. Vol. 1. Madrid: Imprenta Real.
Constitucin poltica de la Monarquia Espaola [1812]. 2001. Facsimile edition. Cadiz: Imprenta
Real.
Cowans, Jon, ed. 2003. Modern Spain: A documentary history. Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania Press.
Cruz Barney, scar. 2001. El rgimen jurdico de los consulados de comercio indianos: 17841795.
Mexico City: Universidad Nacional Autnoma de Mxico.
D.J.C. [Fernando Corradi]. 1812. Catecismo politico arreglado la constitucion de la monarqua
espaola: para ilustracion del pueblo, instruccion de la juventud, yuso de las escuelas de primeras
letra. Madrid: Collado.
D.J.C.A. [Jos Canga Argelles]. 1811. Reexiones sociales, idea para la constitucin espaola, que
un patriota ofrece a los representantes de cortes. Valencia: Jos Estvan.
Danvila y Villarrasa, Bernardo Joaqun. 1779. Lecciones de economia civil, de el comercio. Madrid:
Joaqun Ibarra.
Decretos del Rey Don Fernando VII. Ao primero de su restitucion al trono de las Espaas. 1816. Vol.
1. Madrid: Imprenta Real.
Diario de las Cortes. 1820.
Diario de las discusiones y actas de las cortes. 18101811. Cadiz: Imprenta Real.
Diario de las sesiones de Cortes. Legislatura extraordinaria. 1822.
Dictionnaire de LAcadmie Franaise. 1694. Vol. 1. Paris: Chez la Veuve de Jean Baptiste Coignard.
Doctrina christiana y catecismo para instruccin de los Indios. 1584. Lima: Antonio Ricardo.
Echave y Assu, Francisco de. 1688. La Estrella de Lima. Antwerp: Juan Baptista Verdussen.
Elliott, John H. 2006. Empires of the Atlantic world: Britain and Spain in America 14921830. New
Haven: Yale University Press.
Ensayo sobre la conducta del jeneral Bolvar. 1827. Lima: Republicana por J. M. Concha.
Escoiquiz, Juan de. 1814. Idea sencilla de las razones que motivaron el viage del Rey D. Fernando VII
Bayona en el mes de Abril de 1808. 2nd ed. Madrid: Imprenta Real.
Exposiciones de los scales contra las opiniones de los novadores [1808]. 2007. In Coleccin de doc-
umentos para la historia de la guerra de independencia de Mxico, ed. Juan E. Hernndez y
Dvalos, 1:no. 260. Mexico City: Universidad Nacional Autnoma de Mxico.
Expresiones de la lealtad de Vera-Cruz. 1808. In Demostracin de la lealtad espaola, 1:17274.
Madrid: Imprenta de Repulls.
El fanal del imperio mexicano, o miscelnea poltica. 1822. Vol. 1. Mexico City: L.L.H.H. Morn.
Fernndez lvarez, Manuel, ed. 1979. Corpus documental de Carlos V. Vol. 4. Salamanca: Ediciones
Universidad Salamanca.
Fernndez-Armesto, Felipe. 1982. The Canary Islands after the conquest: The making of a colonial
society in the early sixteenth century. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Flrez Estrada, Alvaro. 1811. Examen imparcial de las disensiones de la Amrica con la Espaa.
London: R. Juign.
Foreign Quarterly Review. 1829. Vol. 4 (AprilAugust).
Funes, Gregorio. 1817. Ensayo de la historia civil del Paraguay, Buenos-Ayres y Tucuman. Vol. 3.
Buenos Aires: Benavente y Compaa.
Gaceta de Caracas. 1809.
Gaceta de Colombia. 1828.
Gaceta del gobierno. 1820, 1821.
Gazeta del gobierno. 1809, 1810.
Gazeta del gobierno de Mxico. 1810, 1812.
Gazeta de Madrid. 1803, 1810, 1812.
Gazeta extraordinaria de la Regencia de Espaa Indias. 1810.
Gazeta ministerial de Chile. 1819.
Gazeta ministerial extraordinaria de Chile. 1821.
Gee, Joshua. 1753. Consideraciones sobre el comercio y la navegacin de la Gran-Bretaa. Trans.
from French by Benito de Noboa y Lisasueta. Madrid: Juan de San Martn.
Gobernantes del Per. Cartas y papeles siglo XVI. 1925. Vol. 9: El Virrey Martn Enrquez. Madrid:
Juan Pueyo. https://archive.org/stream/gobernantesdelpe09peru/gobernantesdelpe09peru_djvu.
txt (accessed 9-26-2014).
Gmez, Jos Belisario. 1861. El Coloniaje. Tacna: Imprenta de El Porvenir por Jos Huidobro
Molina.
Gonzlez y Montoya, Josef. 1811. Rasgos sueltos para la constitucin de Amrica. Cadiz: Imprenta de
la Junta Superior.
Gmez Pacheco de Padilla Horcasitas y Aguayo, Juan Vicente, Conde de Revillagigedo. 1831.
Instruccion reservada que el Conde de Revillas Gigedo, dio a su successor en el mando,
Marqus de Branciforte [1794]. Mexico City: La Calle de las Escalerillas.
Guerra, Franois-Xavier. 2000. The implosion of the Spanish Empire. In The collective and the
public in Latin America: Cultural identities and political order, eds. Luis Roniger and Tamar
Herzog, 7194. Brighton: Sussex Academic Press.
Guerra, Jos [Servando Teresa de Mier]. 1813. Historia de la revolucion de Nueva Espaa, antigua-
mente Anhuac. Vols. 1 and 2. London: G. Glindon.
Gumilla, Joseph. 1745. El Orinoco ilustrado, y defendido. Vol. 1. Madrid: Manuel Fernndez.
Humboldt, Alejandro de. 1966. Ensayo poltico sobre el reino de la Nueva Espaa [18081811/1822].
Mexico City: Editorial Porra.
Iturbide, Agustn de. 1821. Proclama del excmo. Seor Don Agustn de Iturbide. [Mexico City: s.n.].
Jovellanos, Gaspar Melchor de. 1859. Dictamen dado en la Junta de Comercio y Moneda sobre
embarque de paos extranjeros para nuestras colonias. In Obras publicadas inditas de Don
Gaspar Melchor de Jovellanos, 3: 7174. Madrid: M. Rivadeneyra.
Juan, Jorge, and Antonio de Ulloa. 1826. Noticias secretas de Amrica: Estado naval, militar, y
poltico de los reynos del Per y provincias de Quito, costas de Nueva Granada y Chile. Ed.
David Barry. London: R. Taylor.
King, James F. 1953. The colored castes and American representation in the Cortes of Cadiz.
Hispanic American Historical Review 33 (1): 3364.
Klor de Alva, Jorge J. 1992. Colonialism and postcolonialism as (Latin) American mirages. Colonial
Latin American Review 1 (12): 323.
Lallement, M. 1827. Historia de la Repblica de Colombia. Paris: Pinard.
Levene, Ricardo. 1973. Las Indias no eran colonias [1951]. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe.
Lemprire, Annick. 2004. La cuestin colonial. Nuevo Mundo Mundos Nuevos. http://
nuevomundo.revues.org/437; DOI: 10.4000/nuevomundo.437 (accessed 10-14-2015)
Maniesto que hace la junta superior de observacin y defensa del reyno de Valencia. 1809. Valencia:
Ocina de Monfort.
Marichal, Carlos. 2001. Benecios y costos scales del colonialism: las remesas americanas a
Espaa, 17601814. In Finanzas y poltica en el mundo iberoamericano. Del antiguo rgimen a
las naciones independientes 17541850, eds. Ernest Snchez Santir, Luis Juregui, and
Antonio Ibarra, 2962. Mexico City: Universidad Nacional Autnoma de Mxico.
. 2007. Bankruptcy of empire: Mexican silver and the wars between Spain, Britain and France,
17601810. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mazn Gmez, scar. 2012. Architect of the New World: Juan de Solrzano Pereyra and the status
of the Americas. In Polycentric monarchies: How did early modern Spain and Portugal achieve
and maintain a global hegemony?, eds. Pedro Cardim, Tamar Herzog, et al., 2742. Portland:
Sussex Academic Press.
Memorias de los virreyes que han gobernado el Per, durante el tiempo del coloniaje espaol. 1859.
Lima: Librera Central de Felipe Bailly.
Mendibil, Pablo de. 1828. Resmen histrico de la Revolucion de los Estados Unidos Mejicanos
sacado del Cuadro historico, que en forma de cartas escribi el Lic. D. Carlos Mara
Bustamante. London: R. Ackermann.
Mercurio de Espaa. 1818.
Message from the President of the United States. 1818. Washington D.C.: E. de Krafft.
Monitor Araucano. 1813. http:///www.auroradechile.cl/newtenberg/681/printer-2379.html
(accessed 11-09-2014).
Montesquieu, Baron de. 1949. The spirit of the laws [1748]. Trans. Thomas Nugent. New York:
Hafner Press.
[Moino y Redondo, Jos, Conde de Floridablanca]. 1839. Gobierno del Seor Rey Don Carlos III,
instruccin reservada para direccin de la Junta de Estado que cre este monarca, [1787]. Ed.
Andrs Muriel. Madrid: Fuentenebro.
[]. 1790. Representacin hecha por el Conde de Floridablanca, al Sr. D. Carlos III. Tarragona:
Mara Canals Viuda.
Mordella y Spotorno, Antonio. 1808. Mis vaticinios, Espaa regenerada por Fernando VII. Nuestro
Soberano. Valencia: Salvador Fauli.
Moreno, Manuel. 1812. Vida y memorias del Dr. Dn. Mariano Moreno. London: J. McCreery.
Moreno, Mariano. 1809. Representacin de los hacendados. http://es.wikisource.org/wiki/
Representacin_de_los_hacendados (accessed 11-09-2014).
Mox y de Francoli, Benito Mara de. 1808. Coleccin de varios papeles relativos a los sucesos de
Buenos-Ayres. Lima: Imprenta Real de los Hurfanos.
Navarro Garca, Luis. 1959. Intendencias en Indias. Seville: Escuela de Estudios Hispano-ameri-
canos de Sevilla.
. 1983. Campillo y el Nuevo Sistema: Una atribucin dudosa. Temas Americanistas [Seville] 2:
6784.
. 1995. El falso Campillo y el reformismo borbnico. Temas americanistas [Seville] 12: 1031.
. 1996. El Consejo de Castilla y su crtica de la poltica indiana en 1768. In Homenaje al
Profesor Alfonso Garca Gallo, ed. Gustavo Villapalos Salas, III-2: 187207. Madrid: Editorial
Complutense.
. 1998. La poltica americana de Jos de Glvez segn su Discurso y reexiones de un vasallo.
Mlaga: Editorial Algazara.
Nuix, Juan. 1782. Reexiones imparciales sobre la humanidad de los espaoles en las Indias. Trans.
Pedro Varela y Ulloa. Madrid: Joaqun Ibarra.
Observador de la Repblica Mexicana. 1827.
Ordenanza general formada de orden de su magestad [ ] intendentes. 1803. Madrid: Viuda de
Ibarra.
Ortega, Francisco. 2011. Ni nacin ni parte integral: Colonia, de vocablo a concepto en el siglo
XVIII iberoamericano. Prismas. Revista de Historia Intelectual 15: 1129. http://www.scielo.
org.ar/pdf/prismas/v15n1/v15n1a01.pdf (accessed 10-15-2015).
Pagden, Anthony. 1987. Identity formation in Spanish America. In Colonial identity in the Atlantic
world, 15001800, eds. Nicholas Canny and Anthony Pagden, 5193. Princeton: Princeton
University Press.
. 1995a. Heeding Heraclides: Empire and its discontents, 16191812. In Spain, Europe and the
Atlantic world: Essays in honour of John H. Elliott, eds. Richard L. Kagan and Geoffrey Parker,
31633. Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press.
. 1995b. Lords of all the world: Ideologies of empire in Spain, Britain and France c. 1500c.
1800. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Paquette, Gabriel B. 2008. Enlightenment, governance, and reform in Spain and its empire, 1759
1808. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
[Palacio Fajardo, Manuel]. 1817. Outline of the revolution in Spanish America. London: Longman,
Hurst, Rees, Orme, and Brown.
Pardo V., Aristbulo. 1973. Review of La biblioteca americana o Miscelnea de literatura, artes y
ciencias. Thesaurus 27 (2): 4038.
Pons, Franois Joseph de. 1806. A Voyage to the Eastern Part of Terra Firma or the Spanish Main in
South-America, During the Years 1801, 1802, 1803, and 1804. Tomo 1. New York: I. Riley.
Pradt, Dominique de. 1817. De las colonias y de la revolucin actual de la amrica. Vol. 1. Bordeaux:
Juan Pinard.
Priestley, Herbert Ingram. 1916. Jos de Glvez Visitor-General of New Spain 17651771. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Quintana, Manuel Josef. 1810. Discurso de un espaol a los diputados en Cortes. Cadiz: Vicente
Lema.
Raynal, Guillaume-Thomas. 17841790. Historia poltica de los establecimientos ultramarinos de las
naciones europeas. Trans. Eduardo Malo de Luque. Vols. 14. Madrid: Antonio de Sancha.
Real Ordenanza para el establecimiento e instruccin de intendentes de exrcito y provincia en el

Reino de la Nueva Espaa. 1786. Madrid: Imprenta Real.
Real Provisin del Consejo Real, de toma de cargo de los miembros de la Junta Central (Aranjuez 25 de
septiembre de 1808). http://www.cervantesvirtual.com/servlet/SirveObras/c1812/025850854902706
73089079/p0000001.htm#I_2_ (accessed 10-02-2014).
Recopilacin de leyes de los reynos de las Indias [1681]. 1973. Facsimile edition. 4 vols. Madrid:
Ediciones Cultura Hispnica.
Reglamento y aranceles reales para el comercio libre de Espaa a Indias. 1778. Madrid: Pedro Marn.
Representacin de la ciudad de Quertaro para nombrar diputado a la Junta Central. 1809. http://
www.biblioweb.dgsca.unam.mx/dublanylozano/ (accessed 11-04-2014).
Representacin que hizo la M.N.Y L. Ciudad de Mxico el Excelentisimo Seor Virrey, [19 July
1808]. 1808. In Demostracin de la lealtad espaola, 1:15259. Madrid: Imprenta de Repulls.
Representacin y maniesto que algunos diputados las Crtes ordinarias [1814]. 1820. Madrid:
Ibarra.
Restrepo, Jos Manuel. 1827. Historia de la revolucin de la Repblica de Colombia. Vol. 2. Paris:
Librera Americana.
Rico Linage, Raquel. 1999. Constituciones histricas. 3rd ed. Seville: Universidad de Sevilla.
Robertson, William. 1780. The history of America. 3rd ed. Vol. 3. London: W. Strahan et al.
Rodrguez Campomanes, Pedro. 1988. Reexiones sobre el comercio espaol Indias (1762). Ed.
Vicente Llombart Rosa. Madrid: Instituto de Estudios Fiscales.
Rodrguez O., Jaime E. 2008. Equality! The sacred right of equality!: Representation under
Constitution of 1812. Revista de Indias 68 (242): 97122.
[Roscio, Juan Germn]. Congreso General de las Provincias-Unidas of Venezuela. 1811. Maniesto.
Caracas: s.n.
Saint-Vallier, Jean-Baptiste de la Croix de Chevris de. 1688. Estat present de lglise et de la colonie
franoise dans La Nouvelle France. Paris: Robert Pepie. (http://books.google.com [accessed 9-26-
2014]).
Shoemaker, Nancy. 2015. A typology of colonialism. Perspectives on History 53 (7): 2930.
Smith, Adam. 2003. The wealth of nations [1776]. New York: Bantam Dell.
Smith, John. 1632. The generall historie of Virginia, New-England. London: Edward Blackmore.
(https://books.google.com [accessed 9-09-2015]).
Stein, Barbara H., and Stanley J. Stein. 2015. Crisis in an Atlantic empire: Spain and New Spain,
18081810. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Talamantes, Melchor de. 1849. Instrucciones al ayuntamiento de Mjico [1808]. In Historia de
Mjico, Tomo 1, by Lucas Alamn. Mexico City: J. M. Lara.
Tierrarme, D. de. 1830. Revista de Colombia y Venezuela Unida y separada con sus males y sus
remedios. Caracas: Valentn Espinal.
Twinam, Ann. 2015. Purchasing whiteness: Pardos, mulattos, and the quest for social mobility in the
Spanish Indies. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Ulloa, Bernardo de. 1740. Restablecimiento de las fbricas, y comercio espaol. Madrid: Antonio
Marn.
Uztriz, Gernymo de. 1968. Therica, y prctica de comercio, y de marina [1742]. Madrid: Aguilar.
Vlez, Rafael de. 1812. Preservativo contra la irreligion: Los planes de la losoa contra la religion y
el estado. Madrid: Imprenta de Repulls.
Ward, Bernardo. 1779. Proyecto econmico. Madrid: Joaqun Ibarra.
White, John. 1898. The planters plea [1630]. American Colonial Tracts Monthly 2 (3): 149.
Walton, William. 1814. An expos on the dissentions of Spanish America. London: Printed for the
Author.

Burkholder, 2016, Spain S America From Kingdoms To Colonies

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Burkholder, 2016, Spain S America From Kingdoms To Colonies

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Colonial Latin American Review

ISSN: 1060-9164 (Print) 1466-1802 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ccla20

Spains America: from kingdoms to colonies

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10609164.2016.1205241

Published online: 13 Sep 2016.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 106

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

Spains America: from kingdoms to colonies1

Kingdoms of the Crown of Castile

Spains kingdoms and rivals colonies

Foreign views of colonies

Pursuing a new relationship: Spain and the Indies, 1760s1808

becoming accustomed to living independently of the necessities it provided (ibid., 139).

The crisis of 1808

The decree of 14 February 1810

The decree of 15 October 1810

Kingdoms and provinces in a world of colonies

Colonies as a term of deprecation

Ferdinand VII returns to Spain

From colonies to coloniaje

embarking on a discussion of the emancipation of the Spanish colonies (Lallement 1827,

56. Real Provisin 1808. http://www.cervantesvirtual.com/servlet/SirveObras/c1812/

87. Breve discurso 1811, 5, 7, 8.

126. El Observador de la Repblica Mexicana, 20 June 1827, 5758.

Real Ordenanza para el establecimiento e instruccin de intendentes de exrcito y provincia en el

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi