Argentine History

Exam 1, 23rd of October 2016

Pernille Larsen
Words: 2341

The main features of colonial Argentina before independence

Spain and Portugal have for three long centuries ruled in Latin America (Chasteen 2006:59). In the
pre-colonial Latin America, the society persisted of multiple Indian nations, which were simple and
local. The economy was driven by hunting, agriculture and cattle-production on collected land.
Besides, the Indian people believed in multiple gods. This simple life was disturbed by the
colonization, which was both a social, cultural and psychological process (Chasteen 2006:59).
Driving forces in these processes were partially economic and commercial expansion, and also
expansion of the Christianity. Jesuit missions were an alternative but effective way of colonizing,
which showed to be successful in Argentina. After 1680 the Jesuit influence was on its highest, and
Jesuit colleges in Cordoba and Buenos Aires educated elite sons, and colonial administration was
controlled by Jesuits (Rock 1987:50). By 1700 the Jesuit mission included around 50.000 Indians,
and the mission settlements kept growing in size (Rock 1987:51).
During the 16th and 17th century, colonial Argentina was a poor region. Argentina wasnt an
established country but was part of viceroyalties, colonial governments controlled by viceroys from
Spain representing the Spanish king. The economic priorities of the Spanish Crown determined how
the political organization of the colony worked (Chasteen 2006:61). Since 1776, the region was a
part of Virreinato Rio de la Plata together with Bolivia, Paraguay and Uruguay. After crisis in the
Spanish empire in the 17th and 18th century, the Spanish Bourbon Kings from 1700-1788 promoted
Bourbon reforms, which had the objective to modernize the empire, centralize power and end
Americas autonomy, promote economic development, end Spanish declination, and counterbalance
English power. These reforms had essential consequences for Argentina that became a part of the
new virreinato. The reforms increased the economic development, and the role of Buenos Aires
through production of cattle and Atlantic commerce. Despite this, Buenos Aires created
relationships with the provinces. At the same time, the Jesuit-missions declined.
Silver was an important factor in the structuring of the Spanish American colonial economy; the
silver mines of Zacatecas in Mexico and Potos in Peru were already opened in 1540, and the
placement of the Peruvian capital of Lima with its sudden richness became essential for the modern
Argentinean area. An important priority for Rio de la Plata was to stop the Potos silver from escape
through the Argentinian areas without paying taxes.

The reason that the power of the Spaniards and Portuguese was possible is that the indigenous
people and the African slaves partially accepted the colonial life. This can be seen as a kind of
hegemony, which for instance existed culturally in the religion. The church gradually monopolized
power in the educational system and in the individual life (Chasteen 2006:67). Another kind of
hegemony is the patriarchy, which clearly existed in all colonial institution, and in husbands power
over their wives (Chasteen 2006:68).
The social institutions included both forced labour and slavery of Africans. The inhabitants of the
colonial cities became part of an honour system, where viceroys were in power to grant the honours
(Chasteen 2006:70). The Crown even sorted people into fixed castes corresponding to their race,
but also other factors such as education and wealth (Chasteen 2006:83). This led to a lot of racism
against the non-Western people. The caste was noted in the baptismal register as well. A complex
structure of the caste system was evolved, because of the different people in between categories,
even though they tried to impose order in the mixing of races, for instance through paintings of the
caste system (Chasteen 2006:84). Another problem arose as some people from a lower caste were
successful, which is why the Spanish Crown, in order to make money, allowed these people to buy
a white identity, gracias al sacar, which is argued partially to undermine the caste system, and
partially to think of race as negotiable (Chasteen 2006:85).
In the colonial period new kinds of Latin American cultures arose from fusions of Spanish,
indigenous and African cultures, which resulted in many different compositions of culture
(Chasteen 2006:62). This transculturation happened mostly in cities, where indigenous migrants,
European migrants, and African slaves had to adapt to the new environment (Chasteen 2006:72).
Though the ideology and religion of colonizers was often easy to consent to indigenous and African
people, why it goes hand in hand with hegemony (Chasteen 2006:75).
Cities were the centres, because all contact to Europe, administration, and all important tasks, were
urban-based (Chasteen 2006:85). The cabildo, the governing institution outside of Spain, played an
important role in the colonial organization. This was surrounded by the other main institutions; the
cathedral, the governors palace, and mansions for the bishops and richest families (Chasteen
2006:71). Conceptually, you can say that the rural areas of Argentina were opposite to the citycore of the Argentinian body. These rural areas had less export for the Spanish colony, because of

the lack of sugar and metals. Therefore the enslaved Africans and indigenous people forced to
labour were fewer, the bottom of the hierarchy more important for society, and the caste system
therefore less important (Casteen 2006:76). Buenos Aires had, just like the Argentine territory, until
1776, only been important for Peru and Lima. Buenos Aires had been a poor city and contraband.
When they had the status as capital of the viceroyalty, and as an important canal for free and
protected trade between Spain, and their colonies (Rock 1987:40). The capital still couldnt
compete with the powerful cities like Lima and Mexico City, but it became superior to the older
colonial centres (Casteen 2006:77). By the new connections with the Atlantic economy, Buenos
Aires won growing dominance over other regions, also in the Pampas (Rock 1987:40). Around
1800 the Argentinean cattle hide was especially a reason for the progress, but it was limited by the
monopolistic mode controlled by elites in the cabildos trying to control access to land and hide
export trade (Rock 1987:76). The gauchos in the cattle frontiers played a huge role in the rural areas
of Argentina. But because of wars and instabilities abroad affecting the external commerce, the
local political situation was affected (Rock 1987:77).
Buenos Aires had increased its liberal approach to the Atlantic trade, but also exploitive in the case
of interior (Rock 1987:78). In 1810 the first independent movements in Spanish America began.
They started out as looking like civil wars coming both from Caracas, Buenos Aires, Bogot, Quito,
Santiago and Mexico. The motives for these movements were different, and some of them had the
goal of independence, while others wanted more autonomy and freer trade. In Buenos Aires the
political conflict between monopolists and free traders escalated into a revolution (Rock 1987:77).
The orientation of the movement was mainly political. In Rio de la Plata, elite and middle class
were the antagonists in the movement in May 1810 in Revolucin de Mayo in Buenos Aires, and
army, intellectuals, landowners and merchants were part of the revolutionary force. The continental
movement was complex, and even though some promoted a united Spanish America, it ended up as
smaller regions promoted by local elites and empires.

The main features of the rosista period (1829-1852)

Even though Argentina reached independence by the declaration of independence from Spain in
July 1816, it started a period of struggle for Argentina and civil war. This was caused by tensions
between the Federalists, who wanted a federal organization of strong, independent provinces, and
Unitarists, who were liberal thinkers believing in a strong Buenos Aires, elitist and Eurocentric.
Inside the country, regional tensions existed between Buenos Aires, the litoral and the interior
Argentina because of disagreement about the level of control of Buenos Aires and the opinion about
free market policies.
When General Juan Manuel de Rosas became governor of Buenos Aires in 1829, he was greeted as
a saviour, because he with his believes in order, tradition and Catholicism broke with the previous
two years of anarchy (Rock 1987:104). When he came to power, Argentina was affected by crisis
and the civil war. He was given extraordinary faculties by the legislature of Buenos Aires. Rosas
was a Federalist, but not in a traditional sense, more a (..) conservative autocrat dedicated to the
aggrandizement of his own province and to its ranchers and saladeristas (Rock 1987:104). He was
against Constitution and nationalization of customs. His background was in cattle raising and had
been the head of a rural militia force (Rock 1987:104). When he became governor for the first time
in 1829, he used his dictorial power to raise an army of Unitarists and silenced his critics and
opponents by creating censorship, intimidation and banishment. Besides, he managed to create
support from the urban poors of Buenos Aires, mostly among blacks and mullatoes (Rock
1987:105). Rosas also increased the spending in rural areas significantly in the period from 18301834. There were three men dominating the Confederation; Rosas, Estanislao Lpez and Facundo
Quiroga, caudillos of La Rioja, Santa Fe and Buenos Aires, but as Rosas controlled Buenos Aires
and the trade revenue, he denounced himself the strongest among them, and he started to isolate
Buenos Aires from the other regions (Rock 1987:106).
Rosas period as governor ended in 1832, but as Quiroga died in 1935, Rosas was elected as
governor once again. The period was characterized by order and constant conflicts. Again he has
dictatorial power with the blessing of the people, and kept legitimizing his rule through plebiscites
(Rock 1987:106). Rosas was a popular conservative since he had supporters among the elite,

province, gauchos and black population. When the bureaucratic and symbolic regimentation failed,
terror and assassination was used (Rock 1987:107).
In 1836 a tariff law was enacted, and it prohibited imports of cattle, maize, timber and butter in
order to protect local suppliers. The explanation for creating this law was to help agriculture and the
middle class, but instead it ended up burdening in form of taxation (Rock 1987:108). In practice this
is an example of Rosas placing the interests of Buenos Aires above others.
A conflict arising was the French flee blockade of Buenos Aires from 1838 to 1840, which gave the
city a taste of protectionism. In extension of the blockade, a civil war started in 1839; Laville
together with the French invaded Entre Rios from Montevideo, Uruguay declared war on Rosas, the
Bolivians invaded, while the Chascmus rebellion consisting of cattle ranchers arose (Rock
1987:110). All these of Rosas enemies was gradually defeated by Rosas, which gave confirmation
to the political power of Rosas. The regime was geared to go to war in any possible situation, and
the caudillo Rosas was more of a military dictator (Rock 1987:111). Because of a strong attempt to
eliminate competition on trade and controls along the river trade around Vuelta de Obligado, an
Anglo-French blockade took place in 1945, which resulted in another battle (Rock 1987:111). In
1848, Rosas closed the Paran once again, and when he refused to reopen it, Urguiza as last turned
to rebellion and denied his reelection as governor of Buenos Aires with support from Brazilians,
Urguayans, entrerianos, Unitarists, who marched on Buenos Aires in September 1851. In the
beginning of 1851, Rosas was defeated, and Rosas former supporters were massacred (Rock
1876:112).
In this period the only notable social change made was the elimination of the Spanish bureaucracy
and mercantile classes. The old caste system still had a significant role in an informal way. The
countryside of free gauchos still existed as well as slavery (Rock 1987:113).
During the Rosista period, the Unitarist movement renewed itself, and created a new intelligentsia;
The Generation of 1837. They pledged itself to an oligarchic form of government committed to
intensification of material progress, which resulted in new receptions of innovation as well as
support for national unity. The prominent figures regarding this was for instance Domingo F.
Sarmiento and Juan Bautista Alberdi (Rock 1987:114). Both are founders of modern Argentina, and
had strong oppositions against Rosas. Sarmiento pictured the life of Facundo Quiroga as a critique
of the Federalists and caudillos, and especially the crossroads between barbarism and civilization
and the local and Western culture was in focus. The critique was targeting the separation between

county life and city life, where a lack of moral and intellectual education and societal organization
implants barbarism in the nature of the gauchos. He criticises that the progress only took place in
Buenos Aires, and the insecurity that existed outside of the city (Nouzeilles et al.:83). The
characteristics in the life of Argentine people as (..) the reign of brute force, the supremacy of the
strongest, the absolute and irresponsible authority of rulers, the administration of justice without
formalities or discussion (Nouzeilles et al.:85). Sarmiento pictures the different races; Spanish,
natives and Negros, where the pure Spanish race dominates in the rural districts. Also the
subordination that Buenos Aires and Cordoba has made of other towns, the different habits, and the
different lifestyles are depicted (Nouzeilles et al.:86). Sarmiento claims that society has
disappeared, because there is no collective society, and no government and no civil justice therefore
is possible (Nouzeilles et al.:87).
Alberdi focused his critique on the aggressive immigration policy that he thought lacked the
development of civilization. With the slogan to govern is to populate, he was convinced that
Europe would (..) bring us its fresh spirit, its work habits, and its civilized ways with the
immigrants it sends to us (Nouzeilles et al.:95). He makes it clear that they shouldnt be afraid of
mixing different races and nationalities, because it wouldnt lead to a weaker national character
(Nouzeilles et al.:100). Immigration would lead to more order and education, and Alberdi suggested
improvements of transportation, religious tolerance, foreign treaties etc. as ways to reach this.
Alberdi and Sarmiento both criticised the separation of Argentina and the lack of Western influence
and development in the rural areas. Even though Argentina became independent from Spain, and
the caste system no longer formally existed, the social situation still had the same characteristics,
oppositions and problems. The need for modernization was pointed by both Sarmiento and Alberdi.

Literature
Chasteen, John Charles (2006): Colonial crucible in Chasteen, John Charles: Born in blood and
fire. North Carolina: 59-89
Rock, David (1987): Argentina 1516-1987. Berkely, Los Angeles
Nouzeilles, Gabiela and Montaldo, Graciela (2002): Civilization or Barbarism? and Immigration
as a means of progress in The Argentina Reader: History, Culture, Politics