As a rejection of traditional patriotic nineteenth-century Liberal narratives and twentieth-century class-struggle Structuralism, the new Latin American political history analyzes the political dynamics in play during the creation of the modern nation-state, emphasizing concepts like citizenship, national identity, national narratives, political perceptions, interpretations of conflict, and their legacy in the formation of Latin American Nations. This book focuses on the concepts that promoted conflict in the independence of the Kingdom of Guatemala.
The history of the independence of the territory then known as Kingdom of Guatemala, shows that Central Americans had comparatively little interest in separating from Spain. Although there were some revolts between 1811 and 1820, there was no real war for liberation. The unique path of this process of independence, analyzed in this book, allows us to reinterpret other independence movements, precisely because understanding it requires us to ask new or at least not so commonly asked questions.
For example, the idea that the Enlightenment was behind all radical political change in the world does not prove correct in Central America, as Sajid Herrera, Pablo Rodríguez, and Christophe Belaubre explain in their respective chapters. The Bourbon reforms were certainly part of the Enlightenment, but, as Belaubre demonstrates, it was not their political ideas but their economic and social aspects that promoted real change. The implementation of the reforms allowed for the opening of debate and the possibility of imagining new forms of government. On the other hand, Pablo Rodríguez demonstrates how creole pactism was easily translated into constitutionalism once the central government in Spain collapsed under Napoleonic boots. The Cádiz experiment on constitutionalism in 1812 was a preamble for a renewed constitutionalism in Central America and Chiapas in 1821. However, as Herrera points out, it is important to also remember the experience with self-government during the crisis of the Spanish Succession (1700-14). It was, after all, a matter of ideas and perceptions, even of localism, that in Costa Rica pushed the decision to create a constitutional experiment under the Pacto de Concordia, or to make Chiapas reject the authority of Guatemala and claim Mexican protection under the Plan de Iguala.
In essays on oath-taking practices, both Herrera and Xiomara Avendaño demonstrate that ideas are central to keeping order and stability, even during obvious moments of radical change. The tradition of oath-taking derived from royal Spanish tradition. When used to renew allegiances, both legal and mental, between the crown and its subjects, oath-taking served as well to legitimize the new constitutional government of 1812 and, later, the independent government of Guatemala. The use of sacred symbols and images follows the idea of repetition as a key element in the creation of new traditions, which helps to establish a direct link to the past.
In her study of the Nicaraguan revolts of 1811-13, Elizet Payne agrees on the need to revise the reasons for independence in Central America. Her inclusion of grievances brought forward by the popular classes as an important element that promoted political instability in Central America before independence shows the need to study some social aspects of local and internal conflicts in the region during that era. Pollack follows her approach in analyzing the Totonicapan rebellion of 1820, showing that local affairs surfaced once Spanish power weakened. In connection to these rebellions, Timothy Hawkins argues against the image of captain-general José de Bustamante as a villain, which was created by late nineteenth-century nationalist historians to promote a romantic story of liberation for the period of nation-building.
An excellent collection of essays on an understudied region, this book coalesces around the concept of how a “war of words” (71) can promote actions that redefine history.
