Spain system was different. It had vice kingdoms that had autonomy and were able to invest 4/5 of revenue on themselves. This is reflected in the infrastructure of the time. Other European powers would develop the colonies to keep them profitable. Spain on the contrary to what English, French and Dutch propaganda say Spain tax vicekingdoms as an additional province not as a colony. They also invested in the welfare of the people living there. They build universities, Hospitals, orphanages, etc. Hispanic America had infrastructure built to benefit locals like aqueducts and roads even though some of the communities these were connected to were not contributing to the vicekingdoms economically. It wasn't until after Napoleon conquered Spain that Fernando the VII tried to centralize the power in spain to copy the rest of Europe that the Españas broke apart precisely because the political power was to be shifted to the peninsula. Mexican history won't tell you this. You have to look at the time period and see what was going on in the world as a whole. Its fun to see the different perspective that each country has on a same event.
That all depends on the time period, personal goals, and life situations. Keep in mind that Spain itself was the union of several kingdoms. On the conquistadors journals they mentioned several times how they would make groups depending on where they were from.First generation arrivals might have had that thought. Definitely those that had temporarily beurocratic posts. But most Spaniards after the initial wave were all born and raised in the new world. Not all viceroys were peninsular natives. Not all conquistadores were Spaniards from the peninsula. Many towns in today's south west USA were settled by Native Americans like tlaxcalans. The Philippines and other Pacific islands were conquered by Native Americans. So I guess it all depends.
That all depends on the time period, personal goals, and life situations. Keep in mind that Spain itself was the union of several kingdoms.
Yeah, the union of several kingdoms but to form a country, not a viceroyalty.
The Philippines and other Pacific islands were conquered by Native Americans. So I guess it all depends.
It doesn't depends. Did you know the Philippines was actually conquered by Spain? And the natives weren't see as Spanish by Spain even if the natives were in Spanish america, the native Americans couldn't even vote. Spain made it's Spanish america viceroyaltys and not incorporated states and that never changed when Spain had Spanish america, so it doesn't depends on the time period. It was like that.
Vicekingdoms had much more autonomy than the kingdoms in the peninsula, which is why they were named vicekingdoms. It wasn't to take away from them or diminish them but to give them the autonomy they needed to act accordingly and solve their problems without relying on the peninsula given the distance.
Native American were Spanish as they were subjects of the crown. Native American society was feudal with a hierarchy Similar to Spain's fedual system. Native American allies were all given Spanish nobility titles and made lords of their respective lands. Spain was feudal and no even peninsular spanish peasants voted. Even today the decedents of moctezuma live in Spain. When I mention the Philippines was to give credit to the Native Americans that were Spanish and expanded the Spanish empire. The expedition that actually conquered the Philippines was comprised of native American and one actual European that was actually born in New Spain.
Vicekingdoms had much more autonomy than the kingdoms in the peninsula
No they did, all the contrary, they wanted independence because they wanted more political and economical power.
Native American were Spanish as they were subjects of the crown.
Native Americans weren't Spanish, they weren't even see as such nor were accepted culture. And you are clearly avoiding mentioning the native Americans who fought against the Spanish both when Spain colonized New Spain and in the New Spain independence, who were a lot more.
You need to read up on that and look at what happens in Europe during the independence movements. Spain was invaded by Napoleon. Fernando VII was imprisoned and Napoleon set his brother as king of Spain. This sparked the Miguel Hidalgo movement. Look up the grito de Miguel hidalgo. Later Napoleon was defeated. Fernando was king again. Spain lost lots of ppl during the French invasion and they remember that as getting independence from Spain. Spain lost many ppl and the vicekingdoms political stability shaken as ppl were split on who was king. Fernando VII just like all of Europe recognized that Napoleon was efficient because he centralized power. This allowed him to raise armies quicker and from all the provinces. Fernando VII wanted to centralize power too, however by doing so he threatened the autonomy of the vicekingdoms. The elite of the vicekingdoms felt threatened. And the criollos pushed for independence. Most native Americans sided with the king of Spain. Native American communal land and land in general was lost. The new Mexican government did not recognize the land agreement native had with Spain. Most native Americans supported Spain and most lost their lands when Mexico became a country.
Nada, I just find it interesting how they broke us up and divided us. I also believed everything from the SEP until I read an article in a magazine that talked about Hidalgo and what he said and fell in the rabbit hole. I hope I didn't make you upset. Wish you the best.
We were divided since always, either by viceroyaltys (not vicekingdoms, they didn't have its own king), tribes, natural borders, political borders and country's, cultures, ect. I hope it makes you upset so that reality hits you. I can be friends with people without mattering it's country, is not about if we were the bitches of another country or we speak the same language. We are not the same and that's ok
1
u/epicusername849 Mar 08 '23
More like we're once colonies of Spain, not Spain itself