1) Britain’s blockade of Spain in 1797 which lasted for almost two years,
     resulted in the loss of resources and revenues to the mother country from
     the New World.  The black market increased.  These events provided
     proof that Spain wasn’t needed by the colonists.

2) The Napoleonic invasion of Spain in 1808; in his quest to conquer all of
     Europe, Napoleon I was “gobbling up” nation after nation.  He placed his
     relatives in positions of leadership.  His brother, Joseph Bonaparte
     became the king of Spain.

3) 1808 – 1810: Napoleonic France controlled the Mexican port of
     Veracruz.  Napoleon entertained the idea of regaining Louisiana (the
     “Purchase” in 1803 had been negotiated quickly (in two days); the final
     land transfer took place as the result of Spain “retroceding” it to France, and thus
     allowing France to sell it to the United States.

4) Crilloismo, the sense of rivalry and autonomy felt by Creole against uppity
     Peninsulars, also contributed to their move toward independence.

Spanish American colonists held little allegiance to Spain, and even less for France.  By 1810, they determined to go for independence.  The first of these movements took place at Caracas, Venezuela.  The first Latin American nation to win its independence (after Haiti), was Mexico.  On September 10, 1810, the Mexican-born priest and revolutionary Father Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla (1753 – 1811), was a criollo intellectual, who was the parish priest at the village of Dolores.  He attempted to improve the conditions of the Indians living there, but was thwarted by the colonial government.  Finally, in a sermon that became political, called upon the people of Mexico to become independent from Spain, in his famous grito de dolores (cry of Dolores).

Hidalgo’s rebellion followed, beginning with about 300 Indians, at Queretaro.  Fighting under the banner of the Virgin of Guadalupe, it moved south, growing rapidly.  In what became a full-scale Indian uprising, the numbers of revolutionaries (all Indians, led by Criollos) swelled to over ½ million in six months.  The pent-up hatred by the Indians, felt towards Spaniards was uncontrollable.  One problem, was that they were unable to differentiate between Peninsulars and Criollos; to Indians, a Spaniard was a Spaniard, regardless of birthplace; Hidalgo's rebellion was a race war against white colonists (again, this fact is reminiscent of the Haitian war of independence; both the enslaved Africans and African-Americans in Haiti, and the enslaved Indians and Mestizos of Mexico, were reacting violently to the extreme injustices forced on them by centuries of European colonization).

Criollos funded the revolution (Criollos were generally very wealthy).  They were supposed to lead the revolution, but for the most part, they did not want to do the actual fighting, preferring instead, to have the Indians do that.  The Criollos wanted a political revolution (get the Spaniards out, and the Criollos would take over), but the Indians sought a social revolution; they wanted true social and racial equality.  They fought with machetes and any other sharp weapons or tools that they could lay their hands on.

Hidalgo had no real idea of the extent and depth of the Indian hatred toward white Spaniards.  They were armed and at the time had a green light to go to battle.  Victory after victory fueled their fire for revenge for centuries of injustice perpetuated by colonial officials and the Church.  The revolutionary forces stripped the churches of all their gold, and melted it all down into portable quantities, infuriating church officials, who then set themselves against the revolt.  The uncontrollable frenzy of fighting by the massive Indian force resulted in their capture of the cities of Guanajuato and Guadalajara.  Spanish colonial cities and towns fell to the forces of the revolution, one after one.

Ignacio Allende (1779 – 1811), a captain of the colonial army joined his forces with those of Hidalgo.  He and other criollo officers had earlier met at Querétaro, and conspired with Hidalgo for revolution.  Setting out to conquer Mexico City, the massive force defeated the royalist army at Monte de los Cruces (October 30, 1810).  Because the Indian forces did not recognize the difference between Peninsulares and Criollos, many creoles who supported revolution turned their support to the royalists.  But on orders of Hidalgo, the revolutionary army did not pursue Mexico City, and instead turned northwestward, where they were routed at Aculco.  Hidalgo regrouped at Guadalajara, and set out to meet royalist forces led by General and Viceroy of New Spain, Félix María Calleja del Rey (1750 – 1826), at Calderón bridge, (over the Lerma River, east of Guadalajara) on January 17, 1811.  At the point of victory for the revolutionaries, an ammunition wagon exploded spectacularly, frightening Hidalgo’s Indian army, and they fled, only to be butchered by the royalist forces.  Hidalgo, Allende, and other Criollo leaders made their way north, in an attempt to escape into the United States, but they were betrayed by one of Hidalgo’s own insurgents, and captured.  Hidalgo was defrocked and beheaded.  His head was stuck onto a stake, and placed on display in the town square at Guanajuato.  Later, it was pickled in a jar, where for years, it accompanied a circus tour throughout Europe.

Hidalgo was perhaps more of a romantic than a real revolutionary.  The Mexican Revolution of 1810, was not a true revolution, but a war for independence.

Reasons for the failure of the first Mexican Revolution:

1) disagreements between Hidalgo and his leadership (Allende, for example.
2) Indian non-recognition between Peninsulars and Criollos.
3) Hidalgo’s lack of control of the rebellion.
4) Hidalgo’s failure to understand the Indians, and the depth of their rage against white Spaniards.

Another priest, José María Morelos y Pavón (1765 – 1815), who had fought brilliant campaigns against the royalists during the early stages of the revolution, took over where Hidalgo left off, becoming the main war chief.  He successfully captured the towns of Orizaba and Oaxaca in 1812, and Acapulco in 1813.

During this second period of the revolution, (1811 – 1821):

1) the rebels fought the (Bourbon) national army.  The battlegrounds were now in the rural countryside, and the Spaniards had to go out to fight Indian armies on their own turf.
2) There was no central rebel leadership.
3) Ideology and purpose were attached to the Indian’s war.  Ideas for a new government were offered by the rebels.
4) Indians were to assume greater leadership and socio-political decision-making.
5) Two individuals, Francisco Lopez de Santa Anna, and Augustín de Iturbide emerged (the latter man became Mexico’s first president).

Mexico finally won its independence from Spain in 1821.

In 1811, after the execution of Fr. Hidalgo, Fr. Morelos took over the leadership of about 80,000 Indians and the revolution of Mexico (in actuality, he wasn’t their leader, but has become the most recognizable figure of revolutionary leadership).  Morelos was joined by another Creole leader, Fray Mariano Matamoros (d. 1814).   There are, however, great differences in the character of this stage of the revolution (1811 – 1821), from the independence movement which Hidalgo headed.

1) Emphasis from a focus on taking cities, to rural, guerilla warfare.
2) No real central leadership, fragmentation of the revolutionary forces into different Indian-led factions.
3) The Indian goals emphasized widespread equality among the races (as opposed to the overall Creole idea (which had the support of the “higher clergy”) of gaining independence from Spain, while still maintaining their social superiority); the Indian revolutionary goals were symbolized by the image of the Virgin of Guadalupe.
4) The Indian resentment toward an overall Euro-centric Mexican government intensified.
5) A Mestizo uprising joined the Indian rebellion.
6) Emergence of new leaders, especially Augustín Iturbide and Francisco Lopez de Santa Anna.

Under Morelos, Mexican liberals had formed the Constitution of Apatzingán (1813) (at the town of Apatzingán in the present-day Mexican State of Michoacán), which gave the Indians a greater sense of purpose.  This Constitution guaranteed the following terms:

1) Abolition of slavery.
2) Abolition all forms of Indian tribute.
3) Abolition of colonial classification of the different races.
4) Declaration of Independence.
5) Establishment of popular sovereignty.

Bolstered by a great influx of new revolutionaries from the rural regions of southern Mexico, Morelos became anxious to fight, and in an effort to turn the focus of the revolution to the cities, launched an assault on urban areas outside of Mexico City.

Augustín de Iturbide (1783 – 1824): As an officer (general) in the royalist army, Iturbide held the highest rank in the military of New Spain.  He actively repressed the revolutionary forces of Hidalgo, and especially those of Morelos.  His armies soundly defeated those of Morelos at Valladolid (“later named Morelia [in the present-day Mexican State of Michoacán] in his honor”) in 1813.  Morelos and Matamoros were captured, and turned over to the Inquisition, who “degraded” them, had them both shot.

Upon the death of Morelos, two new liberal revolutionary leaders emerged.  The first of these leaders was Guadalupe Victoria (“our Lady of Guadalupe Triumphant,” a name epitomizing revolutionary ideals, 1786? – 1843; his real name was Manuel Félix Fernández).  The next of these new leaders was Vincente Guerrero (1782 – 1831).

In 1820, Itubide was assigned by Viceroy Juan Ruiz de Apodaca (1754 –1835; term as Viceroy, 1816 - 1821) to wage a campaign against the revolutionary leaders Vincente Guerrero and Guadalupe Victoria, who “inflicted minor defeats on Iturbide’s troops.”

Unable to defeat Guerrero and Victoria, Iturbide negotiated the Plan de Iguala, February 24, 1821, at Iguala, (in the present-day state of Guerrero) with them.  Under the Plan were established Three Guarantees:

1) Roman Catholicism as the sole (official) religion of Mexico, thereby “confirming clerical privileges.”
2) “Absolute” independence from Spain, under an independent,  “constitutional monarchy (who was preferably a member of the (Bourbon) Spanish royal family).
3) Racial equality, enabling persons of any race to hold public office.  In actuality, this law only affected a kind of social equality between Peninsulares and Criollos.

Following the establishment of the Plan de Iguala, which formally proclaimed Mexico’s independence, Iturbide, Guerrero, and Victoria joined their forces against those of Viceroy Juan O’Donojú (d. 1821), to defeat him, and captured the City of Mexico.

From the point when these two opposing factors joined forces, the revolution lost its “popular cast,” becoming a movement for Mexican independence which benefited Criollos only, and ensured Creole dominance and control.  In other words, the Peninsulares were thrown out, and the Creoles became the new top-ranking (and still white) ethnic group.

Viceroy O’Donojú capitulated to the demands of the revolutionaries, and representing Spain, he signed the Treaty of Córdoba (September 1821), at Córdoba, Veracruz, finally ending Mexico’s Revolutionary War. A triumphant Iturbide, styling himself after Napoleon Bonaparte, whom he admired, marched with his soldiers, into Mexico City on September 27, 1821, proclaiming himself “the father of Mexican independence.”

Applying these events to a tide that swept throughout Latin Americ, historian Ramón Gutierrez writes:

“On February 21 [other sources cite the date February 24 for this event], 1821, a young officer named Agustín de Iturbide issued the Plan de Iguala formally declaring Mexico’s independence from Spain.  The proclamation of Mexico’s independence ended what had been over a decade of turbulent revolutionary insurgence throughout Spanish America.  Beginning in 1810, one colonial province after another had opted for statehood, until only Cuba and Puerto Rico remained under Spain’s imperial control.  Throughout Mexico independence was greeted with fanfare and celebration.”

On the other hand, Mexican author and educator, José Vasconcelos (1882 – 1959) writes of Iturbide, describing him as “an irresponsible military caudillo, the precursor of that system of government which brought ruin to the country for more than a century.”

As soon as Mexico’s independence was assured, liberal revolutionaries set out to establish their government, based on the Constitution of 1813.  Iturbide on the other hand, promoted a conservative agenda based in part on the Plan de Iguala, and withheld most social reforms as outlined in the Constitution.  He set up a dictatorial provisional government, and directed a search for a Bourbon king to lead Mexico.  Meanwhile, at the Constitutional Convention, the Mexican Congress became divided between the early goals of the revolution and the majority loyalty to Iturbide (of 162 members, 100 backed Iturbide).  Due to this conflict, Iturbide declared the convention “null and void,” and it closed indefinitely.

At Iturbide’s prompting, the Criollo-dominated Mexican Congress selected Spain’s King Ferdinand VII as Mexico’s constitutional monarch. There is good reason for such a decision, because Ferdinand VII was seen as the opponent of Napoleon I, subsequent to the Peninsular War and the Napoleonic invasion of Spain.  From one perspective, the widespread independence movements throughout Latin America (both North and South America) were a reaction to Napoleon’s control of Spain.

When Ferdinand had the good sense not to assume the post and remain in Europe (he had enough problems of his own) and Spain “repudiate[s] the Treaty of Córdoba,” Iturbide’s soldiers proclaimed him King, and he renamed himself Emperor Augustín I in 1822 (in the fashion of Napoleon I).  With the support of his military, the urban masses, and the hegemonic Criollos, and with a great ceremonial display, with his “empress” at his side, Iturbide/Augustín I received his crown.  To reward his devoted military commanders, Emperor Augustín I created the Order of Guadalupe, granting land and titles of knighthood.

But Iturbide/ Augustín I had a problem; his government had no money.  Spanish forces still controlled “the island fortress of San Juan de Ulloa off Veracruz . . .and they were not finally evicted until 1825.  This gave them control of commerce, and prevented customs officials from collecting their toll,” an item which bulked large in the national revenue.”   Thus, Iturbide was not able “to meet the prime requisite [of a military dictator] for staying in power – he could not pay the army.”

Iturbide quickly came under harsh criticism and ridicule by his unpaid generals, the main liberal faction, Freemasons, and most of the Congress.  In a fit, he ordered the arrest and imprisonment of over fifty members of the Mexican Congress, and by October 1822, he abolished the Congress altogether, replacing it with a “governing [military] junta more amenable to his royal will.”

In an effort to evict the Spanish forces from the island fortress off of Veracruz, Emperor Augustín/ Iturbide ordered Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna (1794 – 1876) to lead a force to that end.  Instead, Santa Anna took advantage of the opportunity to consolidate his own power over Iturbide, proclaiming himself against the emperor in December 1822.  At Veracruz, Santa Anna was joined by the revolutionary leader Guadalupe Victoria, and in the following February, they issue their Plan de Casa Mata (1823).  In this Plan, the Empire was declared ended, and a new Republic (after the U.S. and classical models) was created under a new Congress, and a new Constitution (copied almost verbatim from the Constitution of the United States and later approved in 1824).

In March 1823, "Emperor Augustín I" abdicated his throne and fled Mexico into exile in Italy.  As Claremont Graduate School’s historian Hubert Herring notes: “Mexico’s tragicomic digression in monarchy thus ended, she was ready to continue the “labored gestation” of her political institutions.”

Two political parties emerged out of the conflict of the Constitutional Convention in Mexico.  These were the Centralists, founded by Nicolás Bravo and Lucas Alemán, and the Federalists, founded by Gómez Farias and José María Mora.  Iturbide sided with the Centralists, a decision leading to his downfall.  He granted huge tracts of land to himself and his son, and put his own image on all of the new currency, etc.  The ideological differences between the Centralists and the Federalists follow:

          Federalists                                                Centralists
1) Democracy                                             1) Monarchy
2) Autonomy of the State                           2) Strong Central Government
3) Laissez Faire/ free trade                        3) Governmental control of trade
4) Local control of the military                   4) Strong national army
5) Anti-clerical                                             5) Pro-clerical
6) Local control of education                      6) Central control of education

In 1824, Iturbide returned to Mexico, landing at a location on the Gulf coast near Tampico.  Despite a small cadre of supporters, he was abruptly arrested and summarily shot dead.