Excerpts from TR Fehrenbach's "Fire and Blood: A History of Mexico" (1973) on the Mexican War of Independence. The Mexican criollos were far less impressive than their South American counterparts, and produced no leaders equal to Bolivar or San Martin.
Where the South American criollos quickly declared independence upon the French conquest of Spain, the Mexican ones dithered. Acting quickly, the local peninsulares coup'd the government and the criollos accepted it.
With the criollos basically accepting Spanish domination, leadership of the independence struggle passed to men like Miguel Hidalgo, who turned it from a (hopefully) bloodless coup to a social and race war.
Hidalgo appealed to the lower classes by rebelling in the name of the deposed Spanish king, with the cry "Long Live the King, Long Live America, Death to the Bad Government."
Hidalgo's army was effectively a gigantic mob of indio and casta poor, with a tiny core of the remaining criollo revolutionaries. This mob was quite happy to loot and butcher the European townspeople of Mexico, which led the criollos to side firmly with the viceroy.
The Mexican war of independence was incredibly brutal, with torture, massacres, and decimation of civilians on both sides, perhaps in part because Mexican mortality was so high (higher than anywhere outside the Orient) already.
Hidalgo and his mob were defeated by the smaller but much more disciplined and professional army of the viceroy under General Callejas, but other revolutionaries popped up to replace him.
Anarchy swept Mexico, with hundreds of local bandits rising up in the name of independence and liberty, mostly for themselves, to rob and loot, which alienated civilized Mexicans from the idea of independence.
Morelos, in the south, was another casta priest and probably the most disciplined, effective, and idealistic of the independence fighters. The latter proved his undoing; he gave power over to a congress, which turned out to be an ineffective and quarrelling junta.
By 1819, after years of devastating anarchy and civil war, the Mexican insurgents had been thoroughly suppressed and Spanish power appeared stable in New Spain, while the South Americans gained independence.
This produced Mexican independence almost by accident; Spanish troops headed to South America revolted, a liberal junta took power in Spain, and this liberal junta alienated the now-conservative Mexican creoles into independence, which they gained almost as an afterthought.
Agustin de Iturbide, in charge of a Spanish army to suppress one of the few remaining insurgents, changed sides, entered the capital, and declared independence, and that was that.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Excerpts from TR Fehrenbach's "Fire and Blood: A History of Mexico" (1973). The Porfiriato gave Mexico a generation of stability and development for the first time since independence. This left Mexico overdue for another civil war: the Mexican Revolution.
One problem was that the Porfirian school system had created a large, literate middle structure (not class). These educated mestizos became dissatisfied due to lack of opportunity; growth was rapid but not rapid enough to absorb them all.
The Revolution kicked off in 1910, when Diaz announced he'd won reelection with 99% of the vote. This kicked off an insurgency in Chihuahua, in the mestizo, frontier north.
Thread with excerpts from the 'Porfiriato' section of TR Fehrenbach's "Fire and Blood: A History of Mexico" (1973). This was the first era of stability and economic growth in post-independence Mexico, summed up with the slogan "Order and Progress."
Independent Mexico's problem was that Mexicans were incapable of setting aside personalisms for truly national institutions; congress, for example, was a joke.
Benito Juarez greatly expanded secular education; but this turned out to be more of a curse than a boon, because the vast majority of people with schooling insisted on government or legal jobs; very few became doctors or engineers or technicians.
Thread with excerpts from TR Fehrenbach's "Fire and Blood: A History of Mexico" (1973), late 19th century. Like before the war, Mexico after the Mex/Am War was a mess, with many regions sinking into barbarism. Yucatan was the worst, with half the population dying in a race war.
Every Mexican president was a Freemason, but Catholicism was still universal and the position of the Church, which retained its royal privileges even in republican Mexico, was a flashpoint.
The Mexican Church was immensely wealthy thanks to its tax-advantaged status, and the clergy retained legal privileges. It also collected extremely high fees; one effect of this was to ~abolish marriage among the lower classes.
Thread with excerpts from the Mexican-American War section of TR Fehrenbach's "Fire and Blood: A History of Mexico" (1973). Since independence, Mexico had seemingly gone backwards in all respects; in 1840 Mexico was less civilized than it had been.
An incident where French warships blockaded Veracruz over nonpayment of debts from unstable and perpetually-bankrupt Mexican governments. The Mexican response: show "Death to the Anglo-Saxons and Jews" and bring back Santa Anna.
After the secession of Texas, Mexico appeared to be disintegrating, with the Pacific areas effectively independent, much of the North run by bandits chiefs, and Yucatan seceding.
Thread with excerpts from the 'Pretorians' section of TR Fehrenbach's "Fire and Blood: A History of Mexico" (1973). In 1821, postcolonial nation-building seemed easy; the only example was the USA. But the US was homogenous, well-led, free, and already had an identity.
Mexico was the reverse, with no history of self-rule, the criollo/casta/indio split, and no great leadership. The two major factions were the 'continuistas' (conservatives) and the 'reformistas' (liberals).
Mexico was the reverse, with no history of self-rule, the criollo/casta/indio split, and no great leadership. The two major factions were the 'continuistas' (conservatives) and the 'reformistas' (liberals).
Thread with excerpts from the Colonial New Spain portion of TR Fehrenbach's 'Fire and Blood: A History of Mexico' (1973). His view is that New Spain would have remained permanent divided and stagnant if not for the northern frontier.
The true frontier of New Spain was not the thinly-populated and stagnant (almost identical when the Anglos showed up as in the 17th century) New Mexico, but much further to the south, in the arid regions only a little north of the Valley of Mexico.
The frontier lacked civilized Indians who could be reduced to slaves, and was instead populated by energetic mestizos and criollos, working owned ranchos for a market rather than owning huge estates for prestige.