John Charles Chasteen

A history of a continent and a half cannot be contained in 329 pages (plus sources), but Chasteen gives it his best shot. This a fine introductory text, and more enjoyable to read than Kiernan's Viet Nam, but it lacks nuance or detail.

Chasteen traces two major narratives through the many nations of Central and South America. The first is their tripartite cultural heritage, combining in various ways Iberian colonizers, Africa slaves, and indigenous people. The second is swings between show more conservative and modernizing forces. Conservative politics, whether Catholic or based around a cuadillo strongmen, lead to stagnation and revolt. The modernizers, whether early 19th century nationalist revolutionaries, 20th century nationalists of both liberal and Marxist stripes, and 21st century neoliberals, make grand promises that never seem to pan out for the rural majorities of these countries.

I get the difficulty of writing a synthetic history covering millions of square miles and hundreds of years in a reasonable page count. And there are some things which I like, like short "counter-narrative" chapters that showcases countervailing trends. But I have little sense of South America as informed by its history. show less

John Charles Chasteen's Americanos: Latin America's Struggle for Independence relates the somewhat familiar story of the independence struggles of the Spanish and Portuguese colonies in America. The exploits of such famous men as Simon Bolivar, Jose de San Martin, Bernardo O'Higgins, and Father Hidalgo are related in a straightforward, story-telling fashion that breathes new life into an old tale. The activities of lesser know figures (at least from a North American perspective) such as Jose show more Artigas, Antonio Jose de Sucre, and Leona Vicario are described in such a fashion as to make these individuals seem like real people rather than cardboard cutout actors fulfilling a predestined role on stage. Describing the activities of these heroes—these Americanos—is only one part of Chasteen's goals for this work. Broadly speaking, he interprets the revolutionaries' identification of themselves as Americanos and their adoption of the forms of liberalism and liberal democracy as significantly important. Chasteen is a professor of history at the University of North Carolina.
Superficially, Chasteen's work is an admirable synthesis of the important events and personalities of the independence struggles from 1805-1830. Chasteen describes the major events and battles with a straightforward simplicity that is admirably consistent, and imbues the story with intriguing biographical sketches of both well-known figures (Bolivar, O'Higgins et al) as well as the obscure yet indispensable (such as Manuela Saenz, Vicente Guerrero, and Manual Piar.) The result is a well-balanced, colorful history.
On a deeper level, Chasteen seeks to uncover the ideological transformations in how the erstwhile colonials viewed themselves. In the years before independence, colonial society was strictly organized by caste, from europeos to americanos to mestizos and pardos to blacks and Indians. Most of the wealth and power lay with the two top levels of society, with the unspoken understanding that the europeos were the 'most pure' group. Over the course of the struggle, though, the term Americano underwent a redefinition that allowed the incorporation of all non-europeo peoples. "To define America's rainbow of castes as the Americano people recognized the truth on the ground, but it also created a new truth, an airy but potent abstraction. That abstraction was the Sovereign People, who deserved nothing less than a government of, by, and for the people" (2). This expansion of the term ensured a united front against the Spanish colonialists.
This adherence to the principles of popular sovereignty also influenced the form and fashion of the new nations of Latin America. Most eventually took a republican form, with all the trappings of liberal rule: written constitutions, guarantees of liberty, and elections. These were all the result of the redefinition of the people and the revolutionary ideal of rule by the people. While the forms and practices of republicanism were not always followed, and the new nations' liberal institutions were weak, the persistent adherence of Latin America to them testifies to the importance of popular sovereignty in their self-identity as both nation-states and distinct peoples.
Chasteen's work is based solidly on secondary sources, Americanos being a synthesis of existing scholarship rather than an addition to the literature. The bibliographical essays at the end of the text testify to Chasteen's extensive immersion into the literature. Notwithstanding this, this dependence upon published secondary material does weaken somewhat the arguments that he has made concerning Latin American self-identification and the importance of liberal institutions in the development of a distinctive Latin American people and society. The concerns for the validity of these arguments are alleviated somewhat by Chasteen's depth of reading and seeming expertise in the area's history. Nagging concerns do exist, though, that the grand arguments of the book are but speculation.
Americanos is clearly organized topically and chronologically. The book seems well written. Yet, with a topic so broadly extended across time and space it is relatively easy to fail to keep the order or sequence of events occurring in different areas clear. While Chasteen seems to be sympathetic toward his revolutionary protagonists, it is apparent that he does attempt to be objective in his analysis of events (notwithstanding his endorsement of the view that Fernando VII's Spanish arrogance was the cause of his failure to retain Spanish America [159-160]). Overall, Chasteen makes an effort to integrate his work into the larger historical context by pointing out the importance of Latin America as an example to the decolonizing states of Africa and Asia following World War II.
Americanos is a positive addition to the scholarship of Latin American history, mostly for its clear presentation of the state of current knowledge rather than for any groundbreaking theories or advances. show less

I read this book in preparation for my trip to Peru. I had taken course in undergrad that covered most of this material, but this book was a good refresher. Things were presented mostly logically, and the writing was clear. The political bent of this book is kinda anti-US, which makes sense, we have committed many atrocities. The book was mostly balanced though. I learned some new things. I remembered some things I once knew. I have a better understanding of the arc of Latin American show more history, and I feel like it was good preparation for my trip. Overall, a solid introduction to Latin American history. show less

Great, great overview of the histories of the different countries in Latin America. I recommend it a lot to high school students for homework help as a source that's both informative and fun to read.