This week I had quite a bit of trouble comprehending the texts – perhaps in part due to the older language that was used in the documents, but also for the many natural contradictions that seemed to occur in Latin American independence. For example, the simultaneous ability and inability for historians to grant Latin America a “common” story of independence. Almost every Latin American country went through independence around the same time, but each country had a narrative distinct from the other, and as always in the study of Latin America generalization is rarely, if ever, appropriate. Also in this “common story” it is important to recognize that the United States (or at the time the 13 colonies,) was also going through independence from the British, but their story was far different and not Latin American in any sense. Another natural contradiction to my general assumptions was the point that some indigenous people supported the colonial rule, and defended the system of “corporate privileges that seemed to place them at the bottom of a social hierarchy”. Of course, I understand that the “revolutionaries” or those fighting the Spanish colonizers were often of European descent and just as bad if not worse to the indigenous peoples, I was naively surprised that my assumption of indigenous people going along with any sort of rebellion against colonizers was, in fact, incorrect.
This contradiction seemed to also go along with a passage from the “Letter from Jamaica” that confused me. In this letter, Bolivar seems to separate the idea of the Spanish from the idea of Columbus, and likewise separates great qualities that his “people” have gotten from Spain, from the negative aspects… for example, he merits some of the qualities and cultures that Latin Americans have such as “obedience, goodwill, religion, common interest” to Spain, while at the same time calls Spain the “unnatural stepmother” responsible for the death of so many inhabitants of Latin America. Perhaps I was interpreting this text incorrectly? Or, otherwise, perhaps Latin America is filled with conflicting ideas and feelings about their colonizer, which would only seem natural… likewise with toxic or unhealthy human relationships, one party could give the other party many things that it (arguably) needed or benefited them, while still doing it in a horrible, disrespectful and permanently damaging manner.
All in all from this weeks readings I gained a sense of the unfolding confusing relationship between Spain and many Latin American countries, however I would appreciate more clarification and understanding of the context and aim of the “Letter from Jamaica,” as the point of that letter went over my head I believe.
Questions:
- What was Bolivar’s purpose in writing the “Letter from Jamaica”?
- Which contradictions did you find in these writings, if any?
- How does your understanding of Latin American revolution differ from country to country during this time period?
- Were these revolts from the colonizers in any way ideological predecessors to the far left revolutions that would follow centuries later in this same region?
