Mexican War of Independence free essay sample

Mexico still remains a society of divisions that were never addressed through Mexico’s independence because the final leader of the war of independence avoided it. * In the 300 years of Spanish reign, they instilled a social hierarchy and economic ideal, which became impossible to overcome with the passing of time. Since the Conquista, the Spanish based their relationship with the native Indians on brutality, exploitation, and prejudice. This became the basis of the society. The Spanish inability to integrate the Indians into society became the start of the Spanish down fall, and a reason that Mexico still suffers today. Mexico was divided into three social groups: at the bottom were the native Indians, blacks, and the castes; then came the creoles (Mexican-born Spaniards), and then at the top where the peninsulares, the Spaniards. Creoles, although economically equal to the peninsulares, were discriminated against for being white Europeans born in the new world, and therefore they were deprived of positions of power in New Spain. The social barriers were immense between the races making the culture and the economy rely mostly on the work of the poor. While Indians were made to pay tribute but the whites were not expected to. Henderson describes the system as â€Å"intended to perpetuate inequality, in accordance with the Spanish conviction that God designed human society along hierarchical lines. † The Indians were mistreated and deprived in all aspects of life by the governing Spanish, although they were still educated by Catholic missionaries, who came to the New World to convert the Indians, teaching them a loose version of the Catholic Bible and Spanish ideals. While badly mistreated, according to Henderson, the Indians â€Å"may have despised the Spaniards in general, but they revered the distant king, a figure no less abstract or perennially popular than god†. The peninsulares were the royalty of New Spain, but with the decline of Spanish power the peninsular population diminished. With fewer peninsulares the creoles came to power in New Spain, buying their way into powerful positions. As Spain itself was declining rapidly, under both Charles III and his son Charles IV, Spain ended up in the hands of Ferdinand VII. Under Charles III, Spain learned how underutilized its colonies were and implanted the Bourbon reforms to raise the Royal revenues substantially in Spanish America. The reforms only deepened the social prejudices by kicking out the Jesuits (depriving education to the creoles), raising taxes only on the Indians then including the creoles, not allowing Mexicans to dress like Spanish, and finally taking away from the poor entertainment (bullfighting) and cheap alcohol (pulque). The Bourbon reforms ended up most importantly lowering the creoles to minority status. Then Charles IV, who became hated by Spain and her colonies, only enforced the Bourbon reforms; he raised the taxes on the Mexican aristocracy because he would not tax the Spanish. He then decreed the Law of Consolidation of 1804, which ordered the Mexican church to sell its land and give its earnings to the crown also call in most loans it had with creoles and Indians. Napoleon made Charles IV abdicate, and instated Charles’ son Ferdinand VII, and then quickly replaced Ferdinand VII with his brother Joseph. All of Spain and Mexico was in agreement that â€Å"Ferdinand VII was their rightful King and that they would reject any decree or representative from the French usurper†. Which shows the loyalty Spain and its colonies had to their king. With the social injustices occurring and their constant change in governmental authorities, the people showed they disapproval. Rallies of rebels (mostly creoles) would cry, â€Å"Long live the King! Death to bad government! † Which represents the support for the king but they were disgusted towards the local authorities that controlled them on a daily basis. With many failed conspiracies only the conspiracy of Queretaro turned the corner to the start of a revolution. The Conspiracy was built to appeal to the Indians by making it a war against their local Spanish overlords as opposed to â€Å"their (creoles) true motivation†¦ to put political power in the hands of creoles like themselves. They also knew that few of those Indians and castes would fight in the name of independence from Spain: the poor, while they hated Spaniards, had great reverence for King and church†. The creoles promised the Indians that they would get rid of their insanely high tribute payments and they would fight in the name of the King Ferdinand VII. The creoles knew that alone that would not be able to beat the Spanish armies in Mexico, they would need the masses of Indians and poor to fight with them. The Conspiracy was to be led by a rebel priest named Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla. Hidalgo was a man who â€Å"seemed to offer something for everyone†, born a wealthy creole but none a less as a priest appealed to the Indians and the fellow conspirators. Miguel Hidalgo and his fellow conspirators were fighting under one common cause to â€Å"denounce the policies that seemed to perpetuate the glaring and growing divisions in class. The crises unfolding in both Spain and Mexico seemed to offer them a brilliant opportunity to correct those divisions by making a revolution†. At Dolores, early in the morning on September 16, 1810, Miguel Hidalgo, fearing the conspiracy to rebel would be discovered, quickly acted by ordering the church bells to ring calling for a crowd to gather, where he then gave his historic speech of El Grito de Dolores. As Henderson states, â€Å"that he (Hidalgo) told the people of Mexico that the Mexico city junta was actively planning to surrender Mexico to the French, and they must rise up to defend church and king; most likely he promised the Indians an end to tribute payments; and he probably assured that all who joined the cause would be paid wages. He closed his oration with the cry, ‘Long live Fernando VII! Long live America! Long live religion, and death to bad government! ’† So the revolution had begun. * With the poor behind Hidalgo, a charismatic leader he, was â€Å"woefully deficient as a military leader†. Once his army of creoles, castes, and Indians, reached San Miguel, his army ransacked all Spanish stores for â€Å"food and vengeance†. Without enough funding Hidalgo said â€Å"sacking and plundering, were the rights of war and unless the common folk were permitted to do such things they would have no incentive to support the rebellion. † Ignacio Allende, Hidalgo’s second in command, disagreed, for Allende knew that without more discipline was needed. Yet â€Å"Hidalgo defended the mayhem on the grounds that Spaniards had abused the Indians for centuries†. After a rather easy unorganized victory in San Miguel Hidalgo was therefore to be known as Captain General of America and headed for Guanajuato. Guanajuato ended up being a blood bath in which almost all the creoles and Spaniards protecting the treasury were killed without mercy, â€Å"revealing the burning hatred and mutual incomprehension that prevailed between rich and poor†. Hidalgo’s lack of control over his army, as described by Aleman, a famous Mexican historian, depicts Guanajuato as being â€Å"the most lamentable aspect of disorder, ruin and desolation (on the part of Father Hidalgo). † Even though Hidalgo was shocked, he did nothing to stop the looting. The mass savagery performed at Guanajuato became * â€Å"a Pyrrhic victory†¦ not only did the rebels lose many men in the siege, but the sacking of Guanajuato soon became†¦ a cautionary tale that, to moderate and conservative creoles, revealed the horrors that would ensue should they place their fate in the hands of the unwashed masses†. * Henderson 81-82 * After Guanajuato, Hidalgo gave so many military commissions that it became army run by criminals. His newly appointed officers would carry out 350 executions of Spanish prisoners by beheading and mutilating them. With the appointments of unworthy officers and mob-like behavior of his growing army, Hidalgo started to lose creole supporters. * Despite the brutality and the haphazard military direction, his army’s successes improved his fortunes, which allowed him to start produce propaganda to attract Indians and reflect his sympathy for the oppressed. In El Despertador Americano, Miguel Hidalgo claimed that the Spanish â€Å"trampled the rights of the Mexican people†¦desecrating their religion†¦ and he threatened to put to the sword any Spaniard or Mexican who spoke against or opposed the rebellion, refused to free his slaves or gave shelter to a Spaniard. † The propaganda was a realization that he had lost creole support and had to rely on the poor to finish the war. * With a disastrous defeat at Guadalajara, Allende â€Å"was incensed that he had lost every debate over military tactics, even though Hidalgo’s plans had proved consistently catastrophic. Allende then took over the army. He failed to acquire the United States support to fight against the Spanish, and both Hidalgo and Allende were captured by the Royalist army, the tried, executed and were displayed on spikes at the treasury of Guanajuato which the previously plundered. In anyway one looks at Hidalgo’s rebellion, one can not blame him for the huge differences in the social classes, but can be held accountable for his poor military leadership and loss of control over his army, which devastated the land, increased hatreds between Mexicans and Europeans, and delayed Mexico’s independence from Spain. Jose Maria Morelos, a general under Hidalgo, became his successor in 1811. Morelos was a much more capable military leader than Hidalgo having early success in the revolution, and became the â€Å"rebellions most successful general†. Yet, he still failed through major military blunders and a movement that was still unorganized without a unifying ideology. While he is successful in southern Mexico, his first mistake was not taking Puebla, which would have led him to Mexico City. Instead he was stuck in Cuautla, where he was outnumbered, two to one, by royalist forces that laid siege on the town for several months. In desperation he sacrificed all 3000 of his troops for a chance to escape. â€Å"The carnage inflicted upon the insurgents was so terrible that even some Royalist officers were sickened by it†. Morelos denies military advice to attack Mexico City at its vulnerable, and instead insists on taking Acapulco, a port that was no longer significant to the Spanish. While the rebel armies had control over most southern Mexico and portions of central and north Mexico, the rebels declared Independence from Spain in September 1813 and producing a â€Å"viable constitution†. The Declaration of Independence was short sited, â€Å"it declared Mexico Independent, but beyond that it gave little hint as to what the new nation would be like†. It did not take into consideration the difference between classes and would not address it, making the whole war fought for just a change in ruling party. During this time, the royalist army rebuilt itself from being in a demoralized state, with the declaration of Independence, Morelos set his sights on recapturing Valladolid. The Royalist army led by Colonel Agustin Iturbide, a pivotal figure in the war, beat Morelos at Valladolid. Once captured and traded several times between the government and the church then finally trialed and sentenced to death. * With the death of Morelos, the rebellion was slowed down and disorganized with out a prominent leader with a cause. The period during 1816 to 1820, the revolution â€Å"merely became dispersed and disorganized, the domain not of prominent commanders†¦ but rather of freelancers leading small bands of raiders†. It became a war â€Å"more for the lust for booty or vengeance than a desire to free Mexico from foreign domination and create a just society†. Meanwhile in Spain itself was going through her own revolution, trying to push Ferdinand VII back off the throne and bring back the Constitution of 1812 which very much more liberal. * With the situation in Spain developing Colonel Agustin Iturbide, a creole royalist military commander, saw an opportunity, in which would not only benefit him but Mexico as a its own independent country with out anymore bloodshed. Iturbide although Mexican born believed in the Spanish ideals, but * Iturbide had grown favorable to the idea of Mexican independence, though the reasons for his conversion (to the rebel forces) are a bit murky. Some on the grounds might well been cynical an self serving†¦ he had no doubt that leading a successful movement for independence could bring new financial prospects. And he felt that his service to the Spanish crown had been insufficiently appreciated. * Henderson 165 * Iturbide thought the Spain was not deserving of his support and he changed his alliance to his birth land of Mexico. Iturbide wrote, â€Å"my country was about to be drenched in blood; I was led to believe that I had the power to save her, I did not hesitate to undertake so sacred a duty. He then though a matter of dealings with Vicente Guerrero, the rebellions most fit leader, united forces. Iturbide suggested the Plan of Iguala, and as Henderson suggest â€Å"it was ingenious, albeit highly imperfect; neither liberal or revolutionary nor counterrevolutionary; and in the end it said much about the condition of Mexico’s fractured society†. Iturbide now the new leader of the rebel army, brought wit h him a new cause to push for the end of the war, although it being different principles from what they fought for. The Plan of Iguala offered three main ideas/cause to fight for, first that Mexico would only accept the Roman Catholic Church as it’s main religion, second that Mexico would be it’s own independent country, and third that Mexico would be a constitutional monarchy (hopefully still run by Ferdinand VII or a European Royalty). The plan satisfied all the people involved and making no one party the main beneficiary, supplying everyone with a short term result, but creating the same problems they were trying to break away from for down the road. The plan still ensured â€Å"poisonous division in race, class, region, culture, abd ideology were part of the wrap an woof of Mexican society and a mere statement that such divisions were no longer acceptable was unlikely to about the needed transformation. † But Iturbide ideals were inclined to see â€Å"legal equality more as a means of protecting the rights of European Spaniards than elevating the dark skinned masses†. * With no suitable heir to take the Mexican throne, Iturbide becomes the first Mexican Emperor. With the power Iturbide had, he became more and more tyrannical until he was finally exiled then he returned where then he was killed. * Hatred of European Spaniards had fueled the Hidalgo rebellion and much of the popular violence of the revolutionary decade; the superficial paean to fellowship in the Plan of Iguala did nothing at all to diminish that hatred, which was in fact a key element in the Mexico’s incipient nationalism. Henderson, 188 * This is where Iturbide failed by not even trying to change the social trenches that affect Mexico today. The Mexican Wars for Independence by Timothy J. Henderson gives a rather dull view on what pride an entire nation today. The war for independence ended up being a just a change in government performing no other need social change that would fix the issues that still affect Mexico to this day. Hidalgo, although starting out with the right ideals, eventually only supported the poor’s causes, trying to hard to inflict change. U nder Morelos, he was lacking one unified nations state with equality for everyone. Iturbide unlike his predecessors wanted independence from Spain but did not want to take away the prejudice in the social groups, he in the end tried to change the least with the immense opportunity he had in front of him. None of them were able to correct or address the social division created by 300 years of Spanish rule. By doing too little or doing too much. But it was ridiculous to even conceive that 10 years of war could undo 300 years of Spanish colonial rule. * * * * * Bibliography. Timothy J. Henderson, The Mexican Wars of Independence.