essay about the conditions of europe america and spain

The State of Europe, America, and Spain in the 19th Century: A Comparative Analysis

Welcome to my blog, 19th Century ! In this article, we will delve into the condition of Europe, America, and Spain during the vibrant era of the 19th century. Explore the tumultuous events, societal changes, and cultural developments that shaped these regions during this transformative period.

Table of Contents

The 19th century was a period of significant change and transformation for Europe, America, and Spain. Each region experienced unique political, social, and economic developments that shaped their respective paths.

Europe: In the 19th century , Europe witnessed the rise and fall of empires, as well as major political revolutions. The period saw the Napoleonic Wars, which significantly reshaped the power dynamics across the continent. Industrialization also played a crucial role in transforming Europe’s economy, with advancements in technology and manufacturing leading to urbanization and the growth of middle-class industries.

America: The United States underwent a series of transformative events in the 19th century. It started with the Louisiana Purchase, which doubled the size of the country and set the stage for westward expansion. The American Civil War emerged as a defining moment, leading to the abolition of slavery and the reunification of the nation. This period also marked significant economic growth, driven by industrialization, the expansion of the railroad system, and the increase in immigration.

Spain: In the 19th century, Spain faced considerable challenges both domestically and internationally. The Napoleonic invasion and subsequent War of Independence weakened the monarchy and laid the groundwork for the Spanish Constitution of 1812. Spain struggled with political instability throughout the century, experiencing several governmental changes and conflicts, including the Carlist Wars. Additionally, Spain faced the loss of its colonies in Latin America, marking the end of its imperial aspirations.

It is important to highlight that these broad strokes do not cover all the complexities and nuances of each region’s history in the 19th century.

Spain vs. Colombia vs. Mexico vs. Argentina | Spanish Word Differences

15 most gorgeous european fairytale towns, what was the state of spain in the 19th century.

In the 19th century, Spain was facing significant political and social changes. The century began with the Napoleonic invasion in 1808, which resulted in the Peninsular War and the subsequent collapse of Spanish rule in the Americas. This event marked the beginning of a long period of decline for the Spanish Empire.

Throughout the century, Spain experienced political instability with frequent changes in government and numerous coup d’états. The monarchy was restored twice during this period, first with Ferdinand VII in 1814 and then with his daughter Isabella II in 1843. However, these restorations did not bring stability as conflicts between liberals and conservatives persisted.

Economically, Spain faced struggles as well. The loss of its American colonies greatly impacted Spain’s economy, as it lost a significant source of wealth and trade. The country struggled to modernize and industrialize, lagging behind other European nations.

Socially, Spain faced internal conflicts and divisions. Regionalism was prominent, with strong regional identities and demands for autonomy from regions such as Catalonia and the Basque Country. Additionally, there were tensions between the Church and the state, as secularization and liberal ideas clashed with traditional Catholic values.

Despite these challenges, the 19th century also witnessed cultural and intellectual developments in Spain. The Romantic movement had a significant impact on Spanish literature, art, and music, with renowned figures like Francisco de Goya and Gustavo Adolfo Bécquer emerging during this period.

Spain in the 19th century was characterized by political instability, economic struggles, societal divisions, and cultural advancements . These factors played a significant role in shaping the country’s trajectory leading into the 20th century.

What events occurred in Europe during the 19th century?

During the 19th century , Europe experienced significant political, social, and economic changes. Some of the major events that occurred during this period include:

Napoleonic Wars: The series of wars fought between Napoleon Bonaparte’s French Empire and various coalitions of European allies. These wars had a profound impact on the political map of Europe and led to the rise of nationalism.

Industrial Revolution: This period saw the rapid industrialization and urbanization of Europe. It brought about technological advancements, such as the steam engine and mechanization, which transformed the manufacturing processes and led to significant economic growth.

Congress of Vienna: Held in 1814-1815, this international conference aimed to redraw the map of Europe after the defeat of Napoleon. Its main goal was to restore stability and maintain the balance of power among European states.

Revolutions of 1848: A series of uprisings and revolts across Europe by liberals and nationalists who sought political reforms, greater civil rights, and national unification. While these revolutions initially brought change, most were eventually suppressed.

Crimean War: Fought between 1853 and 1856, this conflict involved an alliance of France, Britain, and the Ottoman Empire against Russia. It was primarily fought over control of territories in the Black Sea region and had far-reaching consequences for European power dynamics.

Unification of Italy and Germany: Italy and Germany were unified under the leadership of Giuseppe Garibaldi and Otto von Bismarck, respectively. These processes of nation-building marked significant milestones in European history and contributed to the reshaping of the continent.

Scramble for Africa: European powers, particularly Britain, France, Germany, and Belgium, engaged in a race to colonize and exploit African territories. This period of rapid colonization had lasting effects on Africa’s political and social landscape.

It is important to note that these are just a few key events, and the 19th century was marked by numerous other significant developments, such as the rise of imperialism, the emergence of socialist movements, and advances in science and technology.

Who was in power in Spain during the 19th century?

During the 19th century in Spain, there were various political changes and transitions of power. Isabella II ascended to the throne in 1833 following the death of her father, King Ferdinand VII. However, due to her young age, a regency was established until she came of age in 1843. She ruled as Queen until 1868 when she was overthrown in a revolution.

Following her overthrow, the First Spanish Republic was established in 1873, marking a brief period of republican government in the country. However, it was short-lived and faced internal conflicts and instability.

In 1874, Alfonso XII , son of Isabella II, was restored to the throne, beginning the period known as the Restoration . His reign brought stability and a renewed focus on constitutional monarchy. Alfonso XII passed away in 1885, and his wife Maria Christina of Austria acted as regent for their young son Alfonso XIII .

Alfonso XIII assumed full powers in 1902 when he turned sixteen, and he continued to rule until the early 1930s. His reign witnessed significant political and social changes, including the emergence of political parties, labor movements, and growing regional tensions.

Overall, the 19th century in Spain saw a mix of monarchical rule, a brief republic, and the establishment of constitutional monarchy, shaping the country’s political landscape during that time.

What was taking place in Spain in 1850?

In 1850, several significant events were taking place in Spain in the context of the 19th century. The country was going through a period of political instability, accompanied by social and economic challenges.

One of the most notable occurrences was the Spanish Revolution of 1854 , also known as the Vicalvarada . This revolution resulted in the overthrow of the government led by Baldomero Espartero, who had been ruling as a regent in the absence of Queen Isabella II. The revolution was primarily driven by discontent with Espartero’s authoritarian rule and his failure to address the country’s socioeconomic problems.

Furthermore, during this time, Spain was grappling with colonial issues . The Second Moroccan War (1859-1860) took place, with Spain engaging in military campaigns against Moroccan forces in North Africa. The conflict was primarily driven by Spain’s desire to maintain its colonial presence in the region.

Additionally, Spain faced internal conflicts related to regionalism and separatist movements. The Basque Country witnessed a resurgence of nationalistic sentiments during this period, with the formation of organizations like the Eusko Ikaskuntza to promote Basque culture and heritage.

Moreover, Spain experienced economic challenges, including agricultural crises that affected the livelihoods of farmers and contributed to social unrest. These crises were often accompanied by political unrest , as various factions vied for power and influence.

Overall, 1850 was a significant year for Spain, marked by political instability, colonial conflicts, regionalist movements, and economic challenges. These events played a crucial role in shaping the country’s trajectory and setting the stage for future developments in the latter half of the 19th century.

Frequently Asked Questions

What were the major political and social changes that occurred in europe during the 19th century and how did they shape the condition of the continent.

During the 19th century, Europe underwent significant political and social changes that had a profound impact on the continent’s condition. Some of the major developments include:

Industrial Revolution: The Industrial Revolution transformed European society by introducing mechanization and mass production. This led to the rise of factories, urbanization, and a shift from agrarian economies to industrial ones. It brought about significant social changes, including the emergence of the working class, labor movements, and a new relationship between workers and capitalists.

Nationalism: The 19th century witnessed the rise of nationalism, which fueled the formation of nation-states across Europe. Movements for self-determination and independence emerged, leading to the unification of Italy and Germany. Nationalism also played a role in various revolutions and uprisings, such as the Greek War of Independence and the Polish uprising against Russian rule.

Liberalism: Liberal ideas promoting individual liberties, civil rights, and free markets gained prominence during this period. Liberalism influenced political systems, leading to the establishment of constitutional monarchies, representative governments, and the spread of democracy. It also resulted in the expansion of civil rights and the fight against authoritarianism.

Imperialism: Towards the end of the 19th century, European powers embarked on a scramble for colonies and spheres of influence in Africa, Asia, and the Pacific. Imperialism had a significant impact on Europe’s global power dynamics and shaped the continent’s relations with non-European territories.

Socialism: The rise of industrial capitalism and the harsh conditions faced by the working class gave rise to socialist ideologies. Marxist theories emerged, advocating for the overthrow of capitalist systems and the establishment of a classless society. Socialism challenged traditional power structures and influenced labor movements, resulting in the formation of socialist parties and trade unions.

These political and social changes in Europe during the 19th century transformed the continent in various ways. Industrialization brought economic growth but also created social inequalities and labor struggles. Nationalism led to the reconfiguration of borders and the emergence of new nation-states. Liberalism promoted individual liberties and democratic principles. Imperialism expanded European influence globally. And the rise of socialism challenged prevailing power structures and advocated for workers’ rights. Collectively, these changes shaped Europe’s condition, setting the stage for future developments and laying the foundations for modern European society.

How did the American Civil War impact the condition of America in the 19th century, particularly in terms of politics, economy, and social structure?

The American Civil War had a profound impact on the condition of America in the 19th century, particularly in terms of politics, economy, and social structure.

Politics: The Civil War resulted in the preservation of the United States as a unified nation. The conflict was primarily fought between the Northern states, known as the Union, and the Southern states, known as the Confederacy, which had seceded from the Union due to disagreements over the institution of slavery. The Union’s victory established the federal government’s supremacy over state governments, solidifying the concept of a strong central government.

Economy: The war had significant economic consequences. Initially, the Southern economy heavily relied on slave labor and agriculture, particularly cotton production. With the Emancipation Proclamation and the Union’s push to abolish slavery, the Confederacy suffered the loss of its slave labor force. Additionally, the war disrupted trade and caused inflation, especially in the South. In contrast, the Northern economy experienced industrial growth due to increased demand for supplies, weapons, and clothing for the Union Army. The war also accelerated the process of industrialization in America.

Social Structure: The Civil War brought about profound changes in the social structure of America. Firstly, it led to the abolition of slavery with the ratification of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution in 1865. This marked a crucial step towards the inclusion of African Americans in society, although deep-rooted racism and discrimination continued to persist. The war also led to greater opportunities for women, as they took on new roles in factories and hospitals while men were off fighting. Additionally, the war tested and challenged traditional social hierarchies, creating an environment where potential for social mobility and change became more apparent.

Overall, the American Civil War reshaped America politically, economically, and socially. It set the stage for the country’s emergence as a unified nation and brought about significant changes in its economy and social structure.

What were the main factors that contributed to the decline of Spain as a major global power in the 19th century, and how did this impact the country internally and externally?

The decline of Spain as a major global power in the 19th century can be attributed to several key factors.

1. Napoleonic Wars and Peninsular War: Spain was heavily affected by the Napoleonic Wars, which disrupted its economy and political stability. The Peninsular War against French occupation further weakened the country and depleted its resources.

2. Loss of colonies: Spain’s once vast empire began to crumble in the early 19th century. It lost its American colonies, including Mexico and most of Latin America, due to a combination of independence movements and external pressures. This significantly reduced Spain’s wealth and influence.

3. Political instability: Spain experienced frequent changes in government and political instability throughout the 19th century. This hindered effective governance, economic development, and modernization efforts.

4. Social and economic backwardness: Spain lagged behind other European powers in terms of industrialization and technological advancements during the 19th century. It continued to rely heavily on agrarian and feudal systems, which hindered economic growth and social progress.

5. Internal conflicts: Spain faced numerous internal conflicts, such as regional separatist movements, religious tensions, and periodic political unrest. These conflicts further weakened the country’s unity and ability to compete on the global stage.

The decline of Spain as a major global power had significant impacts both internally and externally.

Internally, Spain’s decline led to social and economic hardships. The loss of colonies and limited industrialization resulted in reduced economic opportunities and increased poverty. The political instability and conflicts created divisions within society, hindering the development of a unified national identity.

Externally, Spain’s decline shifted the balance of power in favor of emerging nations, particularly in Europe and the Americas. Other European powers took advantage of Spain’s weakened position to assert their influence and expand their own colonial holdings. Spain’s loss of colonies also impacted its cultural and linguistic influence globally, as Spanish declined as a dominant language.

Overall, the decline of Spain in the 19th century marked a turning point in its history, highlighting the need for political and economic reforms. It also paved the way for newfound nationalism and struggles for modernization in the 20th century.

The 19th century was a transformative period for Europe, America, and Spain. It witnessed significant changes in politics, economy, and social dynamics, shaping the course of history. Europe experienced a wave of industrialization and urbanization, leading to technological advancements and economic growth. However, it also faced political upheavals and territorial conflicts, including World War I towards the end of the century.

America, on the other hand, was marked by westward expansion, the abolition of slavery, and the Civil War. The United States emerged as an industrial powerhouse, fueled by the growth of railways and the exploitation of natural resources. Meanwhile, Spain faced a decline in its global influence, losing many of its colonies in Latin America and the Philippines.

Throughout the 19th century, these three regions underwent profound changes, both positive and negative. Industrialization brought prosperity but also exploitation, resulting in social inequalities and labor struggles. Nationalism and imperialism fueled conflicts and power struggles, leaving lasting impacts on global relations.

The 19th century laid the foundation for the modern world we live in today. It was a century of progress and turmoil, with each region facing its own unique challenges and opportunities. By understanding and studying this pivotal era , we can gain valuable insights into the complexities of our present-day society and chart a more informed path for the future.

To learn more about this topic, we recommend some related articles:

The Rise and Fall of British Railway Companies in the 19th Century

The Ideologies that Shaped the 19th Century: Exploring Political and Social Movements

Capturing History: Unveiling the Marvels of the 19th Century Camera

The Beauty of 19th Century Watercolor Paintings: Capturing the Essence of an Era

The Impact of Public Health Reform in the 19th Century: Improving Well-being and Society

The Contributions of Henry: Exploring 19th Century British Art Patronage

6.1 European Colonization in the Americas

Learning objectives.

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

• Discuss the encomienda system
• Explain the motivations behind European settlements in North America
• Explain how climate, economics, and geography affected the founding and growth of colonial settlements
• Analyze Indigenous responses to European colonization in the Americas

In the early 1500s, Europeans began founding new settlements in the Americas . Some came to get rich, others to win glory for their empires, a few to spread their faith. Some settlements withered and died, but others became profitable centers for international commerce as goods and people flowed across the Atlantic Ocean. Each community of Native Americans made unique choices and decided for themselves whether to embrace or resist the changing world. Regardless of their choices, however, most Indigenous people suffered severely from European colonization. They could slow the European advance into their world, but they could not stop it.

Spain’s Encomienda System

The Spanish were the first to establish major colonies in North America after Christopher Columbus ’s arrival in 1492. They became the earliest Europeans to force the Indigenous population to labor for them, initially by outright enslavement, a practice that slowly evolved into systems that were more complex. By 1502, they had created the encomienda system as part of a broader search for “God, Gold, and Glory” in their vast empire. In this context, God refers to attempts to spread the Catholic faith, gold to the search for wealth, and glory to hopes of obtaining personal fame.

The term encomienda comes from the Spanish word encomendar , which means “to entrust.” The encomienda was a system of entrusting valuable territories and peoples to those who had proven to the crown that they were worthy of that trust. The Spanish government gave each grantee, known as an encomendero , the right to demand labor from Indigenous people living in a specific area. In exchange, the Spaniards were supposed to provide guidance, education, and leadership to these Native Americans. While encomiendas did not technically include the ownership of any land, encomenderos often took possession of lands where the people under their control lived. Sometimes the system of forced labor even devolved into what was functionally, if not legally, slavery.

Most recipients of encomiendas were conquistadors being rewarded for campaigns that had won glory for Spain. However, a few Native Americans also received them. When the expedition led by conquistador Hernán Cortés fought a war against the Aztec Empire (1519–1521), the Tlaxcalans of central Mexico allied with Cortés’s forces against the Aztecs, their traditional enemies. As a reward for their service, the Spanish government gave some Tlaxcalans encomiendas, and the tribe enjoyed a far better position in the Spanish Empire than many other Native American groups. Perhaps the most unusual encomendera was Malintzin , a formerly enslaved Indigenous woman who served as Cortés’s chief interpreter during the conquest of the Aztec Empire ( Figure 6.3 ). Malintzin received her encomienda as a reward for this service, without which Cortés’s campaign against the Aztecs might have failed.

Encomenderos typically abused their authority, overseeing an exploitive arrangement marked by horrific working conditions and acts of extreme violence against anyone who failed to comply with their demands. The encomienda system became the dominant source of labor in Spanish American colonies, which included areas now known as Florida, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California, Mexico, and much of South America ( Figure 6.4 ).

After a brief period as an encomendero , in 1514 the Dominican friar Bartolomé de las Casas became one of the system’s greatest critics ( Figure 6.5 ). He spent most of the next decade traveling across Latin America and Spain speaking out against its brutality. In his 1552 book, A Short Account of the Destruction of the Indies , Las Casas argued that “the Spanish fell like ravening wolves upon” Native Americans. He claimed the Spanish “tear the natives to shreds, murder them and inflict upon them untold misery, suffering and distress, tormenting, harrying and persecuting them mercilessly.” Las Casas eventually convinced King Charles V to implement the New Laws of 1542 that sought to end the encomienda system, but Spanish settlers in the Americas violently opposed the reforms and the system remained.

Dueling Voices

The impact of spanish colonization.

For insights into Spanish colonization, consider the two following primary sources, the first written by Christopher Columbus in 1492, and the second by Bartolomé de las Casas, a Spanish priest, looking back in 1542 after approximately forty years of experience in Spanish America.

Thursday, October 11 All I saw were youths, none more than thirty years of age. They are very well made, with very handsome bodies, and very good countenances. Their hair is short and coarse, almost like the hairs of a horse’s tail. . . . They neither carry nor know anything of arms, for I showed them swords, and they took them by the blade and cut themselves through ignorance. They have no iron, their darts being wands without iron, some of them having a fish’s tooth at the end, and others being pointed in various ways. . . . They should be good servants and intelligent, for I observed that they quickly took in what was said to them, and I believe that they would easily be made Christians, as it appeared to me that they had no religion. Sunday, October 14 These people are very simple as regards the use of arms, as your Highnesses will see from the seven that I caused to be taken, to bring home and learn our language and return; unless your Highnesses should order them all to be brought to Castile, or to be kept as captives on the same island; for with fifty men they can all be subjugated and made to do what is required of them. — The Journal of Christopher Columbus (During His First Voyage) , Translated by Clements R. Markham

It was upon these gentle lambs, imbued by the Creator with all the qualities we have mentioned, that from the very first day they clapped eyes on them the Spanish fell like ravening wolves upon the fold, or like tigers and savage lions who have not eaten meat for days. The pattern established at the outset has remained unchanged to this day, and the Spaniards still do nothing save tear the natives to shreds, murder them and inflict upon them untold misery, suffering and distress, tormenting, harrying and persecuting them mercilessly. . . . When the Spanish first journeyed there, the indigenous population of the island of Hispaniola stood at some three million; today only two hundred survive. The island of Cuba, which extends for a distance almost as great as that separating Valladolid from Rome, is now to all intents and purposes uninhabited; and two other large, beautiful and fertile islands, Puerto Rico and Jamaica, have been similarly devastated. Not a living soul remains today on any of the islands of the Bahamas, which lie to the north of Hispaniola and Cuba, even though every single one of the sixty or so islands in the group, as well as those known as the Isles of Giants and others in the area, both large and small, is more fertile and more beautiful than the Royal Gardens in Seville. —Bartolomé de las Casas, A Short Account of the Destruction of the Indies

• How does Columbus describe the Native Americans?
• What insights does Las Casas’s account provide into life in the Spanish colonies?
• Why do you think Columbus’s diary is so different from Las Casas’s book?

Link to Learning

Read this longer account by Bartolomé de las Casas of the encomienda system and note the illustrations that accompany it. Consider how the words and text work together to communicate Las Casas’s criticism of the system and of abuses by Spanish colonizers in general.

The complaints of reformers, including Las Casas, inspired the black legend , which claimed the Spanish were particularly cruel imperialists who abused their colonial subjects. Like many historical legends, the black legend is rooted in fact. The Spanish often mistreated Native Americans, but writers from Spain’s colonial rivals, most notably the English, frequently exaggerated Spanish cruelty to justify their own colonial abuses. Despite their intense rivalries, both the English and the Spanish were guilty of abusing Native Americans. Even reformers like Las Casas, who opposed the worst abuses of Native Americans, were flawed. Las Casas’s approach to Native Americans was often paternalistic, and he typically treated non-Europeans as children who would benefit from the benevolent guidance of Europeans rather than as equals.

English Settlements in North America

The English began their colonization efforts in the Americas nearly a century after the Spanish, motivated by both economic and ideological goals. In 1584, Queen Elizabeth gave Sir Walter Raleigh a charter , a royal document that authorized him to establish a colony in North America. The Protestant queen wanted colonies that would act as an ideological counterweight to Spanish Catholicism in the Americas and provide a base of operations for privateering expeditions that would raid Spanish shipping.

Roanoke Island

In July 1587, about 150 settlers led by explorer and artist John White established a colony on Roanoke Island , off the coast of modern North Carolina. The colonists baptized Manteo , a friendly member of the Croatoan tribe, and named him the Lord of Roanoke in an effort to build congenial relationships with the local Native Americans. In late August, White left for England with plans to gather additional investors to fund the colony. Once there, he convinced English merchants to invest in the colony in exchange for trading rights, but the arrival of the Spanish Armada in 1588 delayed his departure. When White finally returned to Roanoke Island in 1590, the colony was gone.

The only clue White found was the word “ Croatoan ” carved into a tree. There are clear signs the settlers intermarried with the Native American population and joined their society, but Europeans of the era dismissed this possibility ( Figure 6.6 ), perhaps because they found it impossible to believe Europeans would willingly join a non-White society. It is also possible the word had nothing to do with the colony’s disappearance. John White was forced to leave before completing a thorough investigation. Today, Roanoke Island is known as “the lost colony,” and its fate remains a mystery.

The creation of joint stock companies provided English colonial efforts after Roanoke Island with improved funding that the English monarchy could not offer. A joint stock company , much like a modern corporation, raised money for its ventures by selling shares to investors. The company then used the pooled funds to conduct operations, including colonization efforts in the Americas. Shareholders were not legally liable for the actions of the company and could not lose more than the amount of their investment, but they could earn large profits if the joint stock company were successful. The combination of limited liability with the possibility of rich returns made joint stock companies an appealing investment for members of England’s growing merchant class, and the companies raised huge sums of money beginning in the early 1600s. England promoted colonization for religious and political reasons, but its reliance on private investors for funding often steered the effort toward profitable activities.

In 1606, the Virginia Company , a joint stock company named for Queen Elizabeth (who was known as the “virgin queen” because she never married), received a charter and sent 144 men and boys to North America. In 1607, these colonists founded Jamestown , named for the new English king, James I , on the banks of the Chesapeake Bay in what is now Virginia. Many of the settlers were the desperate younger sons of elite families who would not inherit property claimed by their older brothers in England. Many others were artisans, including goldsmiths and jewelers, unused to the hard physical labor that building a colony on a new continent required.

The settlers of Jamestown, like many Europeans of the 1600s and 1700s, rooted their economic ideas in mercantilism , an economic theory in which the world’s wealth, as measured in gold and silver, is assumed to be finite, so a gain of wealth for one nation is a loss for another. Mercantilist nations expected their colonies to export raw materials, most importantly precious metals like gold and silver, back to the home country and to purchase goods from it in turn. The English government hoped the Virginia Company would find gold to improve the nation’s trade balances and increase its wealth. Many in Jamestown also hoped to find gold and thereby get rich without having to work hard or suffer any hardships.

The Jamestown settlers did not find gold because there was little mineral wealth in the region, but they did find suffering due to bad weather, starvation, disease, internal political disputes, and military conflicts with the Powhatan tribe (named after its chief). The Powhatans grew to loathe the newcomers for bringing disease and violence to their homeland. Many colonists died during the winter of 1609–1610, known as “ the starving time .” By May 1610, fewer than a hundred remained, and the colony, which had not produced a profit for the Virginia Company, almost failed.

Early Virginia colonists did find wealth and success in tobacco cultivation, however. Despite the need for hard work in difficult conditions, by 1614 Jamestown began exporting tobacco to Europe and earning profits for the Virginia Company. Smoking the highly addictive dried leaves of the plant became a popular habit in Europe.

Like their rivals the Spanish, English colonists struggled to produce agricultural goods using only their own labor. Instead, they relied heavily on indentured servants , European immigrants who typically agreed to work four to seven years in exchange for transportation to the colony and the hope of a new life there after completing their service. Up to 100,000 people, mostly poor men in their twenties, traveled to the English colonies as indentured servants in the 1600s. Many died of disease, exposure, and overwork, but those who survived their term of service often became reasonably comfortable and respected members of the growing settlements. A fortunate few even became wealthy planters.

In 1619, the first Africans arrived in Virginia. Initially they enjoyed the same opportunities to earn their freedom and build wealth as immigrants from Europe, but their condition quickly deteriorated. They were part of a trend that began with the importation of the first Africans into the Americas by the Spanish and Portuguese a century earlier. By the middle of the 1600s, policies were beginning to develop in the Americas that bound Africans to servitude for life, unlike European indentured servants who regained their freedom once they had completed their term of service.

European colonists in Virginia , like those in Mexico, South America, and the Caribbean, sought ways to maintain a permanent labor force, especially when it proved difficult to recruit sufficient indentured servants from Europe. Attempts to coerce the labor of fellow Europeans would have met with too much resistance. Faced with a growing underclass of embittered poor White former servants, who in 1676 sought to overthrow the colony’s government, Virginia’s elite sought to solve their problems by drawing legal distinctions between people of European and African ancestry. They extended privileges to Whites that were denied to Blacks and encouraged European settlers to perceive Africans as inferior people fit only for manual labor, while simultaneously depriving Africans of their freedom. In this way, slavery became associated with African ancestry and racial divisions were created that had not existed before. Racism became the basis on which the colonial labor system was built.

In 1680, the Virginia legislature passed “an act for preventing Negroes Insurrections” that forbid enslaved Africans from carrying weapons, gathering in public, and traveling without permission. Enslaved Africans became the most important source of coerced labor in Virginia, as well as the other English colonies established in the southern part of what became the United States, stretching from Maryland, the colony founded as a haven for English Catholics just north of Virginia, to Georgia. This enslavement in the United States ended only in 1865, after a devastating civil war and the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Slavery continued in other parts of the Western Hemisphere, with Brazil not abolishing it until 1888.

New England

In 1620, Puritan Separatists led by William Bradford left Plymouth, England, on the Mayflower and founded a colony they called Plymouth near what is now Boston, Massachusetts. The Separatists wanted to leave England to escape the Church of England, which they felt was corrupt, and whose interpretation of scripture the Separatists considered lax. Before landing, their leaders signed the Mayflower Compact , a document that emphasized their desire to found a colony for “the glory of God, and Advancement of the Christian Faith, and the Honour of our King and Country.” More than just a religious document, the Mayflower Compact also had a major political impact with its support of direct democracy and of building governments that reflected the will of the people.

Like the English settlers far to the south in Virginia, the Separatists struggled to survive in their new homes. Roughly half died of starvation, disease, malnutrition, and cold during the difficult winter of 1620–1621. Many of the survivors became too weak to work, and soon the entire colony was dependent on the seven who were healthy enough to do so. Political disputes broke out, and the first English colony in New England almost died. Just when Plymouth seemed doomed, Native Americans decided to help. They included Samoset , a member of the Abenaki tribe who had been living with the Wampanoag tribe, and Tisquantum (Squanto) of the Pawtuxet tribe, who had learned to speak some English from fishers who visited the coast before the Separatists arrived. Tisquantum had been kidnapped by English explorer Thomas Hunt and sold into slavery in Spain but had managed to escape to England. There, he joined the Newfoundland Company , another English joint stock company, and had returned to North America in 1619. Samoset, Tisquantum, and other friendly Native Americans helped the English negotiate treaties with nearby tribes and taught them to grow corn, which became the colony’s main food source. But a relationship that may have begun as a friendly attempt to help starving strangers quickly shifted to conflict as the colonizers began seizing Indigenous lands.

A larger group of Puritans followed in 1630 and founded the Massachusetts Bay Colony . Their leader John Winthrop gave a speech titled “A Model of Christian Charity,” which expressed his hopes that the Puritan community in the Americas would embrace the twin goals of building economic prosperity and founding a “City upon a Hill” that would serve as a shining example of an ideal Christian community to the entire world.

The Puritan colonies were also scenes of religious conflict from which dissenters like Anne Hutchinson , who questioned the all-male church leadership, and Roger Williams , who championed religious toleration, were exiled. The Massachusetts Bay Colony’s darkest moment may have come during the 1692 Salem witch trials , when Puritan leaders executed nineteen people for witchcraft. Despite such conflicts, the Puritan colonies eventually became self-sustaining communities that mostly achieved their twin objectives of promoting Puritan religious ideology and building a strong economy.

Puritan settlers hoped a strong economy would allow their colony to flourish, attract new settlers, and provide evidence of God’s favor. Like many Europeans of the 1600s and 1700s, they rooted their economic ideas in mercantilism . The desire to build economic wealth was the primary motive in many colonial ventures, such as Jamestown in Virginia, and provided a secondary motivation in more ideologically driven communities like those set up by the Puritans ( Figure 6.7 ).

French and Dutch Settlements

In 1609, Dutch merchants hired Henry Hudson , an English sea captain, to lead an expedition into the Atlantic Ocean. The Dutch hoped Hudson would find the long-sought Northwest Passage , a mythical water route thought to allow ships from Europe to sail west through the North American continent, cross the Pacific Ocean, and arrive in Asia. Hudson discovered a deep-water port, now known as New York harbor, and a large river, now known as the Hudson, that led inland. For a moment it appeared he had found the Northwest Passage. However, the Hudson River became too shallow for ocean-going ships near present-day Albany, New York, and the expedition turned back. Hudson did not find the Northwest Passage, but he did find a valuable port and rich river valley that he claimed for the Dutch.

After Hudson returned to Europe, the Dutch West India Company , a joint stock company much like the Virginia Company, made plans to set up a small colony in North America. In contrast to the settled agricultural model preferred by English colonists, the Dutch focused on trade. Company directors hoped their colony would improve their access to the North American fur trade, ensure their control of the valuable port eventually known as New York Harbor, and solidify their claim on the area, which they suspected might contain additional sources of wealth they had not yet discovered. In 1624, thirty families aboard the ship Nieu Nederlandt arrived in what is now New York and founded the Dutch colony of New Netherlands . They came for many reasons, but many hoped to become rich by working in the fur trade .

The Dutch, like their Spanish and English colonial rivals, struggled to produce goods using paid labor and sought to remedy the problem with the importation of enslaved Africans . They also encouraged immigration from across Europe with promises of economic opportunities and some level of religious toleration that extended even to Jewish people , who faced severe discrimination in most of Europe. New Netherlands soon became a prosperous colony populated by people from across Europe and Africa. Colonists lived in a band of farms and towns stretching along the Hudson River Valley from New Amsterdam, which is now New York City, north to the village of Beverwijck, now Albany. They engaged in some farming, but they mostly relied on the fur trade for their income.

Beyond the Book

New amsterdam.

New Amsterdam was founded by the Dutch in 1624, at the southern tip of the island now known as Manhattan. The city quickly became a thriving center of trade and commerce. In 1664, an English military expedition captured the city and renamed it New York ( Figure 6.8 ).

• How is New Amsterdam depicted in this picture? What parts of the picture would have seemed familiar to people in the Netherlands?
• Do you think this painting is an accurate depiction of life in seventeenth-century New Amsterdam? Why do you think the European artist chose to portray the city in this fashion?

New Netherlands became a scene of increasing conflict as the colony grew. Initially the Dutch enjoyed friendly relationships with Native Americans eager to trade their furs for European firearms, metal tools, and wool blankets. Serious disputes began, however, when the Dutch demanded payment for the benefits they believed they had brought, including knowledge of the Christian faith and connection to global markets. Native Americans refused to pay, and violence broke out. To protect New Amsterdam from attack, the Dutch forced enslaved Africans to build fortifications along what was then the city’s northeast boundary. The street that ran along these fortifications was known as Wall Street ; it later became a major economic center and the home of the New York Stock Exchange.

Despite intense warfare, Native Americans were unable to expel the Dutch, who faced a far more dangerous threat from the English. In 1664, an English military expedition arrived in New Amsterdam as part of a broader conflict between England and the Netherlands. With little hope of defending themselves from the English warships, the Dutch surrendered. The English gave them generous peace terms and renamed New Amsterdam New York, in honor of the Duke of York who had organized the expedition ( Figure 6.9 ).

The French became aware of colonization opportunities in North America in 1534, when Jacques Cartier voyaged to the area now known as the Gulf of Saint Lawrence in Canada, but they did not rush to set up any colonies. Several early colonization efforts in what is now Canada struggled, mostly due to the harsh northern environment. In 1608, an expedition led by Samuel de Champlain founded Quebec , the first major French settlement in North America. The Company of New France , a joint stock company much like the Virginia Company and the Dutch West India Company, led the early French colonization efforts in North America and helped fund settlements. New France was a collection of French settlements begun in 1534 in what is now Newfoundland. It eventually included much of North America, including Canada and the Mississippi River Valley all the way to southern Louisiana on the Gulf of Mexico.

Like the Dutch, French colonizers focused on trade rather than the settled agricultural model preferred by the English. They earned most of their profits from the lucrative fur market and engaged in fishing off the coast of what is now Canada. Among the French settlers were a small number of French Catholic priests who attempted to convert Native Americans to Christianity , as the Spanish had done in their colonies. Most of these missionaries were members of the Society of Jesus, better known as the Jesuits , a religious organization dedicated to spreading Catholicism and opposing Protestantism. The Jesuits practiced cultural accommodation , a method of integrating a culture into the dominant society without forcing it to fully integrate and adopt all the dominant culture’s components. They just wanted Native Americans to become Catholics and did not care whether they adopted any other aspect of European culture. The Jesuits in Canada also likely realized that they had neither sufficient numbers nor the support from France that would have been necessary to force Indigenous peoples to submit to attempts to change their way of life.

The French probably enjoyed the friendliest relationships with Native Americans of any European colonizers. Unlike their rivals, they usually attempted to solve the shortage of labor by allying themselves with Native Americans. The French sought wealth in furs, and the assistance of Native American tribes, who knew the land much better than did the European newcomers, was needed to best exploit this valuable resource. Also, because few French women came to New France, many French colonists married Native American women, leading to the creation of a multicultural and multiracial society.

In 1627, Cardinal Richelieu , chief minister to King Louis XIII , provided a spiritual justification for Franco-Indian partnerships in the Ordonnance of 1627 . The Ordonnance read in part, “The descendants of the French who are accustomed to this country [New France], together with all the Indians who will be brought to the knowledge of the faith and will profess it, shall be deemed and renowned natural Frenchmen, and as such may come to live in France when they want, and acquire, donate, and succeed and accept donations and legacies, just as true French subjects, without being required to take letters of declaration of naturalization.”

Not all Native Americans wanted to give up their traditional beliefs or become French, but the Ordonnance was an important gesture that the French government was willing to accept them as equal members of society. It helped the French build strong relationships with Native Americans, particularly the Algonquin-speaking tribes that populated most of New France. The French further reinforced their alliance with the Algonquins by providing them with weapons, which they used in their wars with rival Iroquoian-speaking tribes and with Dutch and English settlers.

Even when Indigenous peoples profited from their relationship with European colonists, however, they might still suffer negative consequences. The introduction of guns , for example, made Native American warfare more deadly. As the Iroquois, who were armed by the Dutch, waged war with the French-allied Wendat nation, their European trading partners profited from the trade in stolen pelts.

The use of guns and the incentives offered for killing as many animals as possible had environmental implications as well, because it depleted beaver and deer populations in some areas. The hunger for European manufactured goods encouraged some Native Americans to go into debt to European traders, while the reduction of animal populations left some without the means to pay. Many Indigenous people also became addicted to the alcohol sold or traded by Europeans.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This book may not be used in the training of large language models or otherwise be ingested into large language models or generative AI offerings without OpenStax's permission.

Want to cite, share, or modify this book? This book uses the Creative Commons Attribution License and you must attribute OpenStax.

Access for free at https://openstax.org/books/world-history-volume-2/pages/1-introduction

• Authors: Ann Kordas, Ryan J. Lynch, Brooke Nelson, Julie Tatlock
• Publisher/website: OpenStax
• Book title: World History Volume 2, from 1400
• Publication date: Dec 14, 2022
• Location: Houston, Texas
• Book URL: https://openstax.org/books/world-history-volume-2/pages/1-introduction
• Section URL: https://openstax.org/books/world-history-volume-2/pages/6-1-european-colonization-in-the-americas

© Mar 25, 2024 OpenStax. Textbook content produced by OpenStax is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License . The OpenStax name, OpenStax logo, OpenStax book covers, OpenStax CNX name, and OpenStax CNX logo are not subject to the Creative Commons license and may not be reproduced without the prior and express written consent of Rice University.

MA in American History : Apply now and enroll in graduate courses with top historians this summer!

• AP US History Study Guide
• History U: Courses for High School Students
• History School: Summer Enrichment
• Lesson Plans
• Classroom Resources
• Spotlights on Primary Sources
• Professional Development (Academic Year)
• Professional Development (Summer)
• Book Breaks
• Inside the Vault
• Self-Paced Courses
• Browse All Resources
• Search by Issue
• Search by Essay
• Become a Member (Free)
• Monthly Offer (Free for Members)
• Program Information
• Scholarships and Financial Aid
• Applying and Enrolling
• Eligibility (In-Person)
• EduHam Online
• Hamilton Cast Read Alongs
• Official Website
• Press Coverage
• Veterans Legacy Program
• The Declaration at 250
• Black Lives in the Founding Era
• Celebrating American Historical Holidays
• Browse All Programs
• Donate Items to the Collection
• Search Our Catalog
• Research Guides
• Rights and Reproductions
• See Our Documents on Display
• Bring an Exhibition to Your Organization
• Interactive Exhibitions Online
• About the Transcription Program
• Civil War Letters
• Founding Era Newspapers
• College Fellowships in American History
• Scholarly Fellowship Program
• Richard Gilder History Prize
• David McCullough Essay Prize
• Affiliate School Scholarships
• Nominate a Teacher
• Eligibility
• State Winners
• National Winners
• Gilder Lehrman Lincoln Prize
• Gilder Lehrman Military History Prize
• George Washington Prize
• Frederick Douglass Book Prize
• Our Mission and History
• Annual Report
• Contact Information
• Student Advisory Council
• Teacher Advisory Council
• Board of Trustees
• Remembering Richard Gilder
• President's Council
• Scholarly Advisory Board
• Internships
• Our Partners
• Press Releases

History Resources

Early European Imperial Colonization of the New World

By brendan smyth, introduction.

By the early to mid-seventeenth century, Spain, England, France, and the Netherlands were all competing for colonies and trade around the world. Beginning in the late fifteenth century, explorers, conquerors, missionaries, merchants, and adventurers sought to claim new lands to colonize. It was only a matter of time before imperial rivals butted heads over land possession and trade routes. Competition for land grabs, settlement, trade, and exploration led to the growth of New World imperialism and the economic system of mercantilism. As European nations squabbled and settled lands, much was to be lost on the side of the indigenous Americans. Native populations shifted and decreased from the time of settlement onward.

Guiding Question

Which label best describes the very first wave of European immigration to the Americas in the late fifteenth to early sixteenth centuries: explorers, missionaries, merchants, or conquerors?

Basic-level objective : Skill set: map identification; recall; description; analysis

• Geographically, what areas of the New World were western Europeans interested in settling? 
• What motivated western European powers (France, the Netherlands, England, Spain, and Portugal) to migrate and settle the New World?

Intermediate-level objective: Skill set: compare and contrast; analysis

• How did these European powers differ in their colonization plans? 
• What conflicts arose over competition for land acquisitions in the New World?

Advanced-level objective : Skill set: evaluation and drawing inferences 

• Which label best describes the very first wave of European immigrants to the Americas: explorers, missionaries, merchants, or conquerors?

Vocabulary : imperial; missionaries; imperialism; mercantilism; indigenous

Lesson Procedures

After the introduction and warm-up activity students will read and analyze five different types of materials: a map, three pieces of artwork, and three primary documents. They will then be asked to write a follow-up argumentative writing sample that answers the Guiding Question with support from the materials. Along the way they are to work in groups to actively support one another in the learning of the materials. Each group will have to answer questions that accompany the materials.

Preparation Instructions

Warm-up Activity : Designed to entice the students into learning about Spanish colonization.

Read Bartolome de Las Casas’s narrative:  A Brief Account of the Destruction of the Indies ,  Seville, Spain, 1552

A full text is available here .

These People were found by them to be Wise, Grave, and well dispos’d, though their usual Butcheries and Cruelties in opressing them like Brutes, with heavy Burthens, did rack their minds with great Terror and Anguish. At their Entry into a certain Village, they were welcomed with great Joy and Exultation, replenished them with Victuals, till they were all satisfied, yielding up to them above Six Hundred Men to carry their Bag and Baggage, and like Grooms to look after their Horses: The Spaniards departing thence, a Captain related to the Superiour Tyrant returned thither to rob this (no ways diffident or mistrustful) People, and pierced their King through with a Lance, of which Wound he dyed upon the Spot, and committed several other Cruelties into the bargain. In another Neighboring Town, whose Inhabitants they thought, were more vigilant and watchful, having had the News of their horrid Acts and Deeds, they barbarously murdered them all with their Lances and Swords, destroying all, Young and Old, Great and Small, Lords and Subject without exception.

Vocabulary :

disposed: killed, dead brutes: beast like burthens: old form of the word burden  anguish: hardships exultation: joy, happiness victuals: food diffident: shy, timid vigilant: guarding, watchful

Display the following image from the Brown University Archive of Early American Images, also  available as a PDF  here.

Questions for Discussion : 

• According to sixteenth-century historian Bartolome de Las Casas, how did the Spanish treat the indigenous people they encountered in the New World?
• How does the drawing in the Las Casas book display the Spanish? How does it display the indigenous people?

Lesson Activities

Differentiated instruction 1:  geography of new world colonization.

Please use a map of the Age of Exploration outlining exploration and routes of the Spanish, English, and French (included in most texts and available online) and an atlas or modern political map to compare and contrast.

Questions for Discussion

• What modern nations did Spanish explorers sail to?
• What modern nations did English explorers sail to?
• What modern nations did French explorers sail to?
• What would motivate these Europeans to venture into unknown lands and risk death?
• How have these explorers left their mark on the areas they explored?

Differentiated Instruction 2: Using Art to Assess Spanish Exploration and Colonization

Display William Henry Powell’s Discovery of the Mississippi , 1853

This painting is in the US Capitol Rotunda and can be further studied at the Architect of the Capitol’s website .

Provide students with a basic introduction to the painting, including:

• This painting was made in 1853, three hundred years after the event portrayed.
• The main figure of this painting is Hernándo de Soto, a Spanish explorer who led the first Europeans to visit the Mississippi River and parts of southeastern North America.

Group Work and Questions for Discussion:

• Identify three figures wearing different types of clothing in this painting. Attempt to give them a job title or character title.
• What items in this painting display power?
• What items in this painting display religion?
• How can this painting relate to what motivated the Spanish to explore and colonize the New World?

Differentiated Instruction 3: Captain John Smith

A reading from Captain John Smith

Note that this is written in an older form of English, which can be discerned by having the teacher read this aloud while students read along silently.

Background Information : Captain John Smith was a late sixteenth-/early seventeenth-century Englishman who was a sailor, explorer, and colonist. His adventures in the New World and the settlement of Jamestown, Virginia, paved the way for further English colonization. This letter was published in England to entice Englishmen to migrate to the New World.

LONDON Printed for John Tappe, and are to bee solde at the Greyhound in Paules-Church yard, by W.W. 1608 Anchoring in this Bay, twentie or thirtie went a shore with the Captain, and in coming aboard, they were assalted with certaine Indians, which charged them within Pistoll shot: in which conflict, Captaine Archer and Mathew Morton were shot: whereupon, Captaine Newport seconding them, made a shot at them, which the Indians little respected, but having spent their arrowes retyred without harme, and in that place was the Box opened, wherin the Counsell for Virginia was nominated: and arriving at the place where wee are now seated, the Counsell was sworne, the President elected, which for that yeare was Maister Edm. Maria Wingfield, where was made choice for our scituation a verie fit place for the erecting of a great cittie, about which some contention passed betwixt Capatain Wingfield and Captaine Gosnold, notwithstanding all our provision was brought a shore, and with as much speede as might bee wee went about our fortification. I tolde him being in fight with Spaniards our enemie, being overpowred, neare put to retreat, and by extreame weather put to this shore: where landing at Chesipiack, the people shot us, but Kequoughtan they kindly used us: we by signes demaunded fresh water, they described us up the River was all fresh water: at Paspahegh also they kindly used us: our Pinnsse being leake, we were inforced to stay to mend her, till Captaine Newport my father came to conduct us away.

counsel: government

• What problems did John Smith and his crew face in exploring and settling in the New World?
• How does John Smith portray the Spanish?
• How does John Smith portray the indigenous people he encountered?

Differentiated Instruction 4: Samuel de Champlain

Image study: Deffaite des Yroquois au Lac de Champlain , 1613, published by Chez Iean Berjon, also available from the Library of Congress . This engraving depicts French explorer Samuel de Champlain’s encounter with the Iroquois at the site of modern-day Lake Champlain. 

• How does this engraving depict the indigenous people?
• Who has the military advantage according to this image? Why?

Pair this engraving with the following primary source written by Samuel de Champlain in his   Memoirs of Samuel de Champlain  Books I and II:

Of all the most useful and excellent arts, that of navigation has always seemed to me to occupy the first place. For the more hazardous it is, and the more numerous the perils and losses by which it is attended, so much the more is it esteemed and exalted above all others, being wholly unsuited to the timid and irresolute. By this art we obtain knowledge of different countries, regions, and realms. By it we attract and bring to our own land all kinds of riches, by it the idolatry of paganism is overthrown and Christianity proclaimed throughout all the regions of the earth. This is the art which from my early age has won my love, and induced me to expose myself almost all my life to the impetuous waves of the ocean, and led me to explore the coasts of a part of America, especially of New France, where I have always desired to see the Lily flourish, and also the only religion, catholic, apostolic, and Roman. This I trust now to accomplish with the help of God, assisted by the favor of your Majesty, whom I most humbly entreat to continue to sustain us, in order that all may succeed to the honor of God, the welfare of France, and the splendor of your reign, for the grandeur and prosperity of which I will pray God to attend you always with a thousand blessings, and will remain, 
MADAME,
Your most humble, most obedient,
and most faithful servant and subject,
CHAMPLAIN.

exalted: highly honored irresolute: undecided idolatry: worship of idols Lily: reference to the French symbol of royalty, the fleur de lis

• Summarize the passage: "For the more hazardous it is, and the more numerous the perils and losses by which it is attended, so much the more is it esteemed and exalted above all others, being wholly unsuited to the timid and irresolute."
• What religious plans does Champlain wish to accomplish in the New World?
• What does the reference "I have always desired to see the Lily flourish" mean?

Differentiated Instruction 5: Charter to Sir Walter Raleigh

Note that this is written in an older form of English, which can be discerned by having the teacher read this aloud while students read along silently. This reading is a charter given to Sir Walter Raleigh. Raleigh was an English sailor and adventurer who explored and claimed land in North America for the English Crown.

• What does this charter give Sir Walter Raleigh permission to do?
• How does this charter describe the inhabitants of the New World?
• If you were to label Raleigh’s mission to the New World, which label would it be and explain why?

Charter to Sir Walter Raleigh : 1584

ELIZABETH by the Grace of God of England, Fraunce and Ireland Queene, defender of the faith, &c. To all people to whome these presents shall come, greeting. Knowe yee that of our especial grace, certaine science, and meere motion, we haue given and graunted, and by these presents for us, our heires and successors, we giue and graunt to our trustie and welbeloued seruant Walter Ralegh , Esquire, and to his heires assignee for euer, free libertie and licence from time to time, and at all times for ever hereafter, to discover, search, finde out, and view such remote, heathen and barbarous lands, countries, and territories, not actually possessed of any Christian Prince, nor inhabited by Christian People, as to him, his heires and assignee, and to every or any of them shall seeme good, and the same to haue, horde, occupie and enjoy to him, his heires and assignee for euer, with all prerogatives, commodities, jurisdictions, royalties, privileges, franchises, and preheminences, thereto or thereabouts both by sea and land, whatsoever we by our letters patents may graunt, and as we or any of our noble progenitors haue heretofore graunted to any person or persons, bodies politique.or corporate: and the said Walter Ralegh , his heires and assignee, and all such as from time to time, by licence of us, our heires and successors, shall goe or trauaile thither to inhabite or remaine, there to build and fortifie, at the discretion of the said Walter Ralegh , his heires and assignee, the statutes or acte of Parliament made against fugitives, or against such as shall depart, romaine or continue out of our Realme of England without licence, or any other statute, acte, lawe, or any ordinance whatsoever to the contrary in anywise notwithstanding.

preheminences: permanencies: those that surpass all others jurisdictions: areas where law applies

Stay up to date, and subscribe to our quarterly newsletter.

Learn how the Institute impacts history education through our work guiding teachers, energizing students, and supporting research.

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons

Margin Size

• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

2.3: Challenges to Spain’s Supremacy

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 2082

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

For Europeans, the discovery of an Atlantic World meant newfound wealth in the form of gold and silver as well as valuable furs. The Americas also provided a new arena for intense imperial rivalry as different European nations jockeyed for preeminence in the New World. The religious motives for colonization spurred European expansion as well, and as the Protestant Reformation gained ground beginning in the 1520s, rivalries between Catholic and Protestant Christians spilled over into the Americas.

ENGLISH EXPLORATION

Disruptions during the Tudor monarchy—especially the creation of the Protestant Church of England by Henry VIII in the 1530s, the return of the nation to Catholicism under Queen Mary in the 1550s, and the restoration of Protestantism under Queen Elizabeth—left England with little energy for overseas projects. More important, England lacked the financial resources for such endeavors. Nonetheless, English monarchs carefully monitored developments in the new Atlantic World and took steps to assert England’s claim to the Americas. As early as 1497, Henry VII of England had commissioned John Cabot, an Italian mariner, to explore new lands. Cabot sailed from England that year and made landfall somewhere along the North American coastline. For the next century, English fishermen routinely crossed the Atlantic to fish the rich waters off the North American coast. However, English colonization efforts in the 1500s were closer to home, as England devoted its energy to the colonization of Ireland.

Queen Elizabeth favored England’s advance into the Atlantic World, though her main concern was blocking Spain’s effort to eliminate Protestantism. Indeed, England could not commit to large-scale colonization in the Americas as long as Spain appeared ready to invade Ireland or Scotland. Nonetheless, Elizabeth approved of English privateers, sea captains to whom the home government had given permission to raid the enemy at will. These skilled mariners cruised the Caribbean, plundering Spanish ships whenever they could. Each year the English took more than £100,000 from Spain in this way; English privateer Francis Drake first made a name for himself when, in 1573, he looted silver, gold, and pearls worth £40,000.

Elizabeth did sanction an early attempt at colonization in 1584, when Sir Walter Raleigh, a favorite of the queen’s, attempted to establish a colony at Roanoke, an island off the coast of present-day North Carolina. The colony was small, consisting of only 117 people, who suffered a poor relationship with the local Indians, the Croatans, and struggled to survive in their new land (Figure 2.3.1). Their governor, John White, returned to England in late 1587 to secure more people and supplies, but events conspired to keep him away from Roanoke for three years. By the time he returned in 1590, the entire colony had vanished. The only trace the colonists left behind was the word Croatoan carved into a fence surrounding the village. Governor White never knew whether the colonists had decamped for nearby Croatoan Island (now Hatteras) or whether some disaster had befallen them all. Roanoke is still called “the lost colony.”

English promoters of colonization pushed its commercial advantages and the religious justification that English colonies would allow the establishment of Protestantism in the Americas. Both arguments struck a chord. In the early 1600s, wealthy English merchants and the landed elite began to pool their resources to form joint stock companies. In this novel business arrangement, which was in many ways the precursor to the modern corporation, investors provided the capital for and assumed the risk of a venture in order to reap significant returns. The companies gained the approval of the English crown to establish colonies, and their investors dreamed of reaping great profits from the money they put into overseas colonization.

The first permanent English settlement was established by a joint stock company, the Virginia Company. Named for Elizabeth, the “virgin queen,” the company gained royal approval to establish a colony on the east coast of North America, and in 1606, it sent 144 men and boys to the New World. In early 1607, this group sailed up Chesapeake Bay. Finding a river they called the James in honor of their new king, James I, they established a ramshackle settlement and named it Jamestown. Despite serious struggles, the colony survived.

Many of Jamestown’s settlers were desperate men; although they came from elite families, they were younger sons who would not inherit their father’s estates. The Jamestown adventurers believed they would find instant wealth in the New World and did not actually expect to have to perform work. Henry Percy, the eighth son of the Earl of Northumberland, was among them. His account, excerpted below, illustrates the hardships the English confronted in Virginia in 1607.

MY STORY: GEORGE PERCY AND THE FIRST MONTHS AT JAMESTOWN

The 144 men and boys who started the Jamestown colony faced many hardships; by the end of the first winter, only 38 had survived. Disease, hunger, and poor relationships with local natives all contributed to the colony’s high death toll. George Percy, who served twice as governor of Jamestown, kept records of the colonists’ first months in the colony. These records were later published in London in 1608. This excerpt is from his account of August and September of 1607.

The fourth day of September died Thomas Jacob Sergeant. The fifth day, there died Benjamin Beast. Our men were destroyed with cruel diseases, as Swellings, Fluxes, Burning Fevers, and by wars, and some departed suddenly, but for the most part they died of mere famine. There were never Englishmen left in a foreign Country in such misery as we were in this new discovered Virginia. . . . Our food was but a small Can of Barley sod* in water, to five men a day, our drink cold water taken out of the River, which was at a flood very salty, at a low tide full of slime and filth, which was the destruction of many of our men. Thus we lived for the space of five months in this miserable distress, not having five able men to man our Bulwarks upon any occasion. If it had not pleased God to have put a terror in the Savages’ hearts, we had all perished by those wild and cruel Pagans, being in that weak estate as we were; our men night and day groaning in every corner of the Fort most pitiful to hear. If there were any conscience in men, it would make their hearts to bleed to hear the pitiful murmurings and outcries of our sick men without relief, every night and day, for the space of six weeks, some departing out of the World, many times three or four in a night; in the morning, their bodies trailed out of their Cabins like Dogs to be buried. In this sort did I see the mortality of diverse of our people.

According to George Percy’s account, what were the major problems the Jamestown settlers encountered? What kept the colony from complete destruction?

By any measure, England came late to the race to colonize. As Jamestown limped along in the 1610s, the Spanish Empire extended around the globe and grew rich from its global colonial project. Yet the English persisted, and for this reason the Jamestown settlement has a special place in history as the first permanent colony in what later became the United States.

After Jamestown’s founding, English colonization of the New World accelerated. In 1609, a ship bound for Jamestown foundered in a storm and landed on Bermuda. (Some believe this incident helped inspire Shakespeare’s 1611 play The Tempest .) The admiral of the ship, George Somers, claimed the island for the English crown. The English also began to colonize small islands in the Caribbean, an incursion into the Spanish American empire. They established themselves on small islands such as St. Christopher (1624), Barbados (1627), Nevis (1628), Montserrat (1632), and Antigua (1632).

From the start, the English West Indies had a commercial orientation, for these islands produced cash crops: first tobacco and then sugar. Very quickly, by the mid-1600s, Barbados had become one of the most important English colonies because of the sugar produced there. Barbados was the first English colony dependent on slaves, and it became a model for other English slave societies on the American mainland. These differed radically from England itself, where slavery was not practiced.

English Puritans also began to colonize the Americas in the 1620s and 1630s. These intensely religious migrants dreamed of creating communities of reformed Protestantism where the corruption of England would be eliminated. One of the first groups of Puritans to remove to North America, known asPilgrims and led by William Bradford, had originally left England to live in the Netherlands. Fearing their children were losing their English identity among the Dutch, however, they sailed for North America in 1620 to settle at Plymouth, the first English settlement in New England. The Pilgrims differed from other Puritans in their insistence on separating from what they saw as the corrupt Church of England. For this reason, Pilgrims are known as Separatists.

Like Jamestown, Plymouth occupies an iconic place in American national memory. The tale of the 102 migrants who crossed the Atlantic aboard the Mayflower and their struggle for survival is a well-known narrative of the founding of the country. Their story includes the signing of the Mayflower Compact, a written agreement whereby the English voluntarily agreed to help each other. Some interpret this 1620 document as an expression of democratic spirit because of the cooperative and inclusive nature of the agreement to live and work together. In 1630, a much larger contingent of Puritans left England to escape conformity to the Church of England and founded the Massachusetts Bay Colony. In the following years, thousands more arrived to create a new life in the rocky soils and cold climates of New England.

In comparison to Catholic Spain, however, Protestant England remained a very weak imperial player in the early seventeenth century, with only a few infant colonies in the Americas in the early 1600s. The English never found treasure equal to that of the Aztec city of Tenochtitlán, and England did not quickly grow rich from its small American outposts. The English colonies also differed from each other; Barbados and Virginia had a decidedly commercial orientation from the start, while the Puritan colonies of New England were intensely religious at their inception. All English settlements in America, however, marked the increasingly important role of England in the Atlantic World.

FRENCH EXPLORATION

Spanish exploits in the New World whetted the appetite of other would-be imperial powers, including France. Like Spain, France was a Catholic nation and committed to expanding Catholicism around the globe. In the early sixteenth century, it joined the race to explore the New World and exploit the resources of the Western Hemisphere. Navigator Jacques Cartier claimed northern North America for France, naming the area New France. From 1534 to 1541, he made three voyages of discovery on the Gulf of St. Lawrence and the St. Lawrence River. Like other explorers, Cartier made exaggerated claims of mineral wealth in America, but he was unable to send great riches back to France. Due to resistance from the native peoples as well as his own lack of planning, he could not establish a permanent settlement in North America.

Explorer Samuel de Champlain occupies a special place in the history of the Atlantic World for his role in establishing the French presence in the New World. Champlain explored the Caribbean in 1601 and then the coast of New England in 1603 before traveling farther north. In 1608 he founded Quebec, and he made numerous Atlantic crossings as he worked tirelessly to promote New France. Unlike other imperial powers, France—through Champlain’s efforts—fostered especially good relationships with native peoples, paving the way for French exploration further into the continent: around the Great Lakes, around Hudson Bay, and eventually to the Mississippi. Champlain made an alliance with the Huron confederacy and the Algonquins and agreed to fight with them against their enemy, the Iroquois (Figure 2.3.2).

The French were primarily interested in establishing commercially viable colonial outposts, and to that end, they created extensive trading networks in New France. These networks relied on native hunters to harvest furs, especially beaver pelts, and to exchange these items for French glass beads and other trade goods. (French fashion at the time favored broad-brimmed hats trimmed in beaver fur, so French traders had a ready market for their North American goods.) The French also dreamed of replicating the wealth of Spain by colonizing the tropical zones. After Spanish control of the Caribbean began to weaken, the French turned their attention to small islands in the West Indies, and by 1635 they had colonized two, Guadeloupe and Martinique. Though it lagged far behind Spain, France now boasted its own West Indian colonies. Both islands became lucrative sugar plantation sites that turned a profit for French planters by relying on African slave labor.

Click and Explore:

To see how cartographers throughout history documented the exploration of the Atlantic World, browse the hundreds of digitized historical maps that make up the collection American Shores: Maps of the Middle Atlantic Region to 1850 at the New York Public Library.

DUTCH COLONIZATION

Dutch entrance into the Atlantic World is part of the larger story of religious and imperial conflict in the early modern era. In the 1500s, Calvinism, one of the major Protestant reform movements, had found adherents in the northern provinces of the Spanish Netherlands. During the sixteenth century, these provinces began a long struggle to achieve independence from Catholic Spain. Established in 1581 but not recognized as independent by Spain until 1648, the Dutch Republic, or Holland, quickly made itself a powerful force in the race for Atlantic colonies and wealth. The Dutch distinguished themselves as commercial leaders in the seventeenth century (Figure 2.3.3), and their mode of colonization relied on powerful corporations: the Dutch East India Company, chartered in 1602 to trade in Asia, and the Dutch West India Company, established in 1621 to colonize and trade in the Americas.

While employed by the Dutch East India Company in 1609, the English sea captain Henry Hudson explored New York Harbor and the river that now bears his name. Like many explorers of the time, Hudson was actually seeking a northwest passage to Asia and its wealth, but the ample furs harvested from the region he explored, especially the coveted beaver pelts, provided a reason to claim it for the Netherlands. The Dutch named their colony New Netherlands, and it served as a fur-trading outpost for the expanding and powerful Dutch West India Company. With headquarters in New Amsterdam on the island of Manhattan, the Dutch set up several regional trading posts, including one at Fort Orange—named for the royal Dutch House of Orange-Nassau—in present-day Albany. (The color orange remains significant to the Dutch, having become particularly associated with William of Orange, Protestantism, and the Glorious Revolution of 1688.) A brisk trade in furs with local Algonquian and Iroquois peoples brought the Dutch and native peoples together in a commercial network that extended throughout the Hudson River Valley and beyond.

The Dutch West India Company in turn established colonies on Aruba, Bonaire, and Curaçao, St. Martin, St. Eustatius, and Saba. With their outposts in New Netherlands and the Caribbean, the Dutch had established themselves in the seventeenth century as a commercially powerful rival to Spain. Amsterdam became a trade hub for all the Atlantic World.

Section Summary

By the beginning of the seventeenth century, Spain’s rivals—England, France, and the Dutch Republic—had each established an Atlantic presence, with greater or lesser success, in the race for imperial power. None of the new colonies, all in the eastern part of North America, could match the Spanish possessions for gold and silver resources. Nonetheless, their presence in the New World helped these nations establish claims that they hoped could halt the runaway growth of Spain’s Catholic empire. English colonists in Virginia suffered greatly, expecting riches to fall into their hands and finding reality a harsh blow. However, the colony at Jamestown survived, and the output of England’s islands in the West Indies soon grew to be an important source of income for the country. New France and New Netherlands were modest colonial holdings in the northeast of the continent, but these colonies’ thriving fur trade with native peoples, and their alliances with those peoples, helped to create the foundation for later shifts in the global balance of power.

Review Questions

Why didn’t England make stronger attempts to colonize the New World before the late sixteenth to early seventeenth century?

English attention was turned to internal struggles and the encroaching Catholic menace to Scotland and Ireland.

The English monarchy did not want to declare direct war on Spain by attempting to colonize the Americas.

The English military was occupied in battling for control of New Netherlands.

The English crown refused to fund colonial expeditions.

What was the main goal of the French in colonizing the Americas?

establishing a colony with French subjects

trading, especially for furs

gaining control of shipping lanes

spreading Catholicism among native peoples

What were some of the main differences among the non-Spanish colonies?

Many English colonists in Virginia were aristocrats who had never worked and didn’t expect to start. They hoped to find gold and silver and were unprepared for the realities of colonial life. Farther north, the English Puritan colonies were largely founded not for profit but for religious reasons. The French and Dutch colonies were primarily trading posts. Their colonists enjoyed good relationships with many native groups because they made alliances with and traded with them.

The European Union: Spain’s Accession Essay

Introduction, the spanish society debate, the new spanish course, accession to the eu.

The majority of Western European countries joined the EU under conditions of democratic evolution and the existence of long-standing multilateral relations in various fields with their neighbors in the region, which is why the Spanish case is special. Its accession to the European Union, which occurred on 1 January 1986 in the phase of consolidation of democracy, was a momentous event in the history of this country (Flynn & Giráldez, 2017, p. 18). Isolated for centuries from Europe in many aspects, Spain has become part of the community of Western democracies, an active participant in European integration and the international division of labor. It also changed its place in the world and ended its social and political isolation. Therefore, it is essential to establish the reasons for EU accession and to characterize the political process.

It is essential to mention that Spain’s historical relations with Europe have been framed in various forms. During its golden age in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the Spanish Empire, with its numerous colonies, sought European hegemony and acted as a defender of European unity (Pierson, 2019). However, the collapse of power and the loss of overseas possessions stimulated the tendency toward isolationism, which also asked for the geopolitical isolation of this mountainous country on land from the more developed nations of the continent. Nevertheless, isolationism has completely never prevailed due to the same geopolitical specificity.

This is because Spain is located at the crossroads of different cultures in Europe, the Mediterranean, Latin America, and North Africa. The Spanish political culture was heterogeneous and atomic, with a mixture of opposing values and attitudes, including isolation from Europe and attraction to it. Until the 1970s, the question of belonging to Europe was a constant source of heated debate in public opinion (Pierson, 2019, p. 34). Primarily among intellectuals in times of national crises and catastrophes, the country was faced with the dilemma of finding its own original way or following the European course of progress in politics and culture.

Moreover, Spanish society at that time had two widespread opinions about the future of Spain. There was the isolationist view that integration with the West was fraught with the loss of many attractive features of the national character. For instance, a negative attitude toward wealth, asceticism, the capacity for self-sacrifice, and a sense of collectivism (Pierson, 2019). Nonetheless, Europeanists considered that many of these traits were a product of Spain’s cultural backwardness and that integration with the West would produce new, appealing qualities of the national character.

It should be emphasized that during the years of the Franco dictatorship, the domestic and foreign policy priorities of the authorities successively replaced each other. By the end of the 1950s, Francoism was implementing a policy of autarchy, such as the creation of an isolated, closed state that did not participate in the international division of labor (Pierson, 2019). Meanwhile, militant nationalism and xenophobia were cultivated in society. However, the acute financial and monetary crisis that occurred in the second half of the 1950s, accompanied by inflation and state budget deficits, signaled the need for a change in policy. Therefore, against the background of the economic success of many Western European countries that signed the Treaty of Rome in 1957, it clearly revealed the inefficiency of the economic mechanism of Spain, isolated from Europe (Pierson, 2019). Moreover, one of the most significant results of the policy of autarky was a distorted financial relationship and a distorted system of fundamental values.

Consequently, the issue of in-depth economic reform, capable of reducing state intervention in the economy, restoring the role of deformed commodity-money relations, and attracting foreign capital, was on the agenda. It was a dramatic moment in the political history of Francoism when the question of the socio-economic development model was decided (Pierson, 2019). That is the transition to an open economy, inseparable from the development of connections with the international community and the common market or the continuation of the policy of autarchy. Nevertheless, during a fierce struggle between supporters of modernization and the Falangists, the former won. In this way, a more transparent economy was set in motion.

It is essential to mention that the change in Spain’s political and economic course was proceeding quickly. The 1960s and 1970s were the time of the “Spanish economic miracle,” when the advantages of the transition to an open economy became clearly apparent (Brydan, 2019, p. 81). Mass labor migration to Western European countries and even more mass foreign tourism expanded all connections with the outside world. Moreover, immigration and the reception of tourists made it possible to compare various ideas and forms of life (Brydan, 2019). It is important to note that there was also a critical reconsideration of centuries of animosity toward foreigners and perceptions of Spain’s superiority over other countries.

Although the country had not yet freed itself from the oppression of the authoritarian regime, there had been a genuine spiritual revolution and a radical change in the system of values. In addition, the configurations of the 1960s and 1970s are often viewed as, perhaps, more significant for the country over several centuries (Brydan, 2019). Therefore, through the counter-flow of foreigners, emigrants, and tourists into and out of Spain, Spaniards learned for the first time in their history to consider their faults and virtues as commodities. Thus, only a few years ago, the Spanish were unaware of the laws of political economy. As with most Third World peoples, they used to view the utilitarianism of developed societies with a mixture of envy and contempt (Brydan, 2019). The Spanish were exposed to the values of more progressive societies through tourism and emigration. This prolonged overdue psychological upheaval, which neither the Lutheran Reformation of the sixteenth century nor the nineteenth-century industrial revolution could produce in Spain, tourism accomplished in a short time, without violence or bloodshed (Brydan, 2019). It is essential to remark that the Spanish have made a European choice.

Europe became considered a standard of freedom and progress, a model to be followed. The public’s attitudes were fully consistent with the orientations of most political organizations in Spain (Brydan, 2019). As early as the 1960s, one of the main reasons for rallying the opposition forces was the idea of joining the EU, which was associated with eliminating the dictatorship and the transition to democracy. The pro-European sentiment of the opposition was reinforced by the fact that the negotiations conducted by the Franco regime with representatives of the EU in 1962-1966 about admission to Spain were unsuccessful (Brydan, 2019, p. 96). This was because Western European governments, considering the anti-Franco sentiments of their public, refused to accept broad cooperation with that country.

The idea of joining the EU became even more vigorously promoted during the post-Franco phase. It was perceived by leading political forces as an imperative of economic development, necessary to overcome the financial crisis, modernize the economy and strengthen the country’s foreign policy positions. Moreover, the importance of accession to the EU was also justified by the need to enhance domestic political stability and consolidate the young Spanish democracy (Brydan, 2019). Furthermore, the admission of Western democracies into society became a guarantee against an ultra-right revolution, the danger of which appeared to many progressively-minded Spanish people to be extremely dangerous. The attitude of the country’s leading politicians toward the EU was influenced by the nature of “Spanish-style” democratization (Brydan, 2019, p. 103). Francism was eliminated not through military defeat or suppression, but through reforms from above, without the radical destruction and purging of the old state system.

It is also important to note the key politicians of the time who had considerable influence in Spain. Therefore, the leading politicians in the transition phase were King Juan Carlos, appointed by Franco, and President Suárez, who held several public offices during the dictatorship. This implies that the continuity with Francoism made it difficult for political parties to legitimize the new regime. Consequently, it was not possible to claim that the new government was fundamentally distinct from the previous one. In this context, the accession to the EU acquired a symbolic meaning, signaling a separation from the authoritarian Frankist regime. In other words, this step became a sign of the legitimization of Spanish democracy.

All the leading parties in Spain were in favor of accession to the EU. This is the ruling center-right Democratic Center Union, the right-wing People’s Union, the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party, and the Communist Party (Brydan, 2019). In addition, this demand was also supported by the trade unions, the Trade Union Confederation of Workers’ Commissions, affiliated with the Communist Party. When considering the whole range of political organizations in Spain, it should be mentioned that only the neo-Francoists and the leftist groups were against the country’s accession to the EU (Brydan, 2019). Spain’s European choice of expanding political pluralism, reducing the importance of the state’s role in the economy, and limiting the country’s foreign policy independence, contradicted the models of public order that it advocated.

Therefore, the major political forces in Spain have reached a consensus on the question of accession to the EU. In this aspect, the Spanish situation contrasted with that of the other Southern European countries, Portugal and Greece, where authoritarian regimes had also been dismantled. In these two countries, such a consensus did not emerge during the transition phase (Brydan, 2019). This is due to the position of some leftist forces, especially the Communist parties, which held an orthodox line and strongly opposed joining the EU. Hence, the European choice became a subject of internal political struggle in these states.

It is essential to consider the stages of Spain’s accession to the European Union. The first stage of examination occurred in the years 1976-77 (Flynn & Giráldez, 2017, p. 61). Then negotiations began between the EU and the new Spanish Government on the Kingdom’s “European” prospects. The Spanish Government received approval from the EU to apply. The second phase followed that roughly attributed to the years 1977-82 (Flynn & Giráldez, 2017, p. 85). It was at this time that Spain formally used to join the Community.

During that same period, a new Constitution of the Kingdom was adopted, and the mechanism for implementing international legal standards was updated. Moreover, the third stage was in 1982-1985, when negotiations were held between the Spanish Government and the leaders of the Community, and the European Institutions on the conditions for Spain’s accession to the EU (Flynn & Giráldez, 2017, p. 97). Therefore the Spanish Government succeeded in convincing Brussels to grant a six-year transitional period for industrial products, a seven-year period for agricultural products, and ten years for vegetables. In addition, during this period, Spain began harmonizing its legislation with EU requirements and adapting Community regulations.

Finally, the fourth stage of Spain’s integration into the European Union should be highlighted. From a chronological perspective, it should be mentioned that in 1985 the negotiations for Spain’s accession to the EU were concluded, and the required documents were signed. Moreover, on May 8, 1985, the European Parliament adopted a special resolution approving the signing of the “Treaty of Accession to the European Union in Spain” (Flynn & Giráldez, 2017, p. 103). It is also important to note that, in the EU institutions, Spain received eight votes in the EU Council, two European Commissioner posts, 60 of the 518 mandates of the European Parliament, and one post of 13 in the EU Court of Justice. Considering that in 1985 Spain’s share of the total GDP of all member countries was only 6.5%, the average representation in EU structures of 11% can be regarded as a significant diplomatic victory (Flynn & Giráldez, 2017, p. 100). In this way, Spain became a full member of the European Union and began developing its foreign and domestic policy per European values.

Therefore, accession to the EU has increased Spain’s international importance and its role in Europe and the world. In deciding between the European and Atlanticist components of its own foreign policy, Spain favors the former. Therefore, the course adopted by society was the basis of the country’s domestic and foreign policy. The policy of European integration and Spain’s participation in the EU has helped the state to cope with significant challenges that have existed for a long time.

Brydan, D. (2019). Franco’s internationalists: Social experts and Spain’s search for legitimacy. Oxford University Press.

Flynn, D. O., & Giráldez, A. (2017). European entry into the Pacific: Spain and the Acapulco-Manila Galleons. Routledge.

Pierson, P. (2019). The history of Spain . ABC-CLIO.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, April 27). The European Union: Spain's Accession. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-european-union-spains-accession/

"The European Union: Spain's Accession." IvyPanda , 27 Apr. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/the-european-union-spains-accession/.

IvyPanda . (2024) 'The European Union: Spain's Accession'. 27 April.

IvyPanda . 2024. "The European Union: Spain's Accession." April 27, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-european-union-spains-accession/.

1. IvyPanda . "The European Union: Spain's Accession." April 27, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-european-union-spains-accession/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "The European Union: Spain's Accession." April 27, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-european-union-spains-accession/.

• China’s Accession to the World Trade Organization
• Importance of Accession to Healthy Fresh Food Regularly
• Political and Economic Consequences of EU Enlargement
• United Nations' Effectiveness in Maintaining Peace
• The Dissatisfaction with the European Union
• New Global Role of North Atlantic Treaty Organization
• "Is Brexit Bad News for Poland" by Adam Easton
• Strategic Planning: Human Rights Watch

VUS.2 - Describe how early European exploration and colonization resulted in cultural interactions among Europeans, Africans, and American Indians.

For many years, students of American history have learned about the era of European exploration and colonization in terms of conquest and defeat. Europe's entry into the Americas had economic and political motivations, but over the last several years historians have begun to emphasize that exploration and colonization also allowed cultural contacts and exchanges among three different continents: Europe, Africa, and America. Each society viewed the other through their respective perceptions and culture. Historians like Colin Calloway and Gary Nash explain that these relationships created "new worlds for all." The nature of cultural contact and change in America varied from region to region, and can be traced to Europe's different colonizing strategies and the response of the existing local population.

America, Africa, and Europe: Three Worlds on the Eve of 1492

Contrary to longstanding European assumptions, native societies in the Americas possessed their own rich and varied cultures. An estimated 3 to 5 million people, speaking hundreds of languages, inhabited the region; with about 60 million people living in the Western Hemisphere, the population rivaled that of Europe and Africa. While they did not yet possess the same farming techniques or methods of transportation as those of Europe and Africa, these societies were diverse and sophisticated, and adapted continually to changing environments. Irrigation communities in the Southwest, mound cities in the Mississippi and Ohio Valleys, and the villages of the eastern woodlands characterized the nature of these societies at the time of European contact. Climatic changes, over hundreds of years, had altered farming patterns and prompted different groups to compete for dominance through warfare, as well as to participate in a vast trade network that spread across the continent.

The African societies (like those of the American Indians and the Europeans) were highly dependent on the environmental conditions and varied widely across the continent. Africa very much resembled America in its diversity of cultures across deserts, grasslands, and forests, its established networks of trade, and resource competition. The early use of iron implements raised productivity and subsequently increased the continent's population, which reached about 50 million by the fifteenth century. Much of that population was organized politically under large empires, like the Kingdom of Ghana. Ghana achieved architectural and artistic wealth principally through important trading contacts with the Middle and Far East. Other kingdoms also developed skilled craftsmanship, codes of law, and trading networks. Alongside these trade relationships, Muslim influences, which had spread throughout Africa since the eleventh century, also shaped African community life. African societies differed most markedly from those in Europe in terms of familial organization (matrilineal rather than patrilineal). For example, property rights and inheritance descended through the mother.

Europeans did not engage with Africa until the early fifteenth century, though they had been fascinated with the East for hundreds of years prior to contact. They were particularly eager to control the Mediterranean trade routes that tapped into the vast markets and goods. Throughout the Middle Ages, the East also served as a battleground for two of the world's fastest growing religions, Islam and Christianity, as evidenced in the Crusades. The Catholic Church and the Holy Roman Empire ruled supreme over Europe in opposition to the growing Ottoman (Islamic) Empire. By the fifteenth century, the invention of the printing press and improvements in navigation techniques (like the compass and the hourglass) helped spawn the Renaissance, an era known for challenging the power of the Church and celebrating human possibility though exploration, ideas, art, and literature. Spain joined in this creative celebration, but also gained political power by successfully defeating Islamic forces in Granada and by consolidating two powerful Catholic monarchies through the marriage of Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabella of Castille. In 1492, the two Catholic leaders launched the Inquisition to make Spain, once part of the Ottoman Empire, into a fully Catholic country. Their efforts spawned the Reconquista , an era fueled by violence and religious intolerance as Spain sought to expel all Jews and Muslims from its borders. Amidst this political climate and activity, Ferdinand and Isabella granted a Genoan explorer, Christopher Columbus, funding to expand Spain's empire.

1492: America's Indians Encounter the Spanish

After he landed on the islands we know today as the Bahamas, Columbus explored the island of Hispaniola where he met the land's native inhabitants. He and his crews returned to the Caribbean three more times. Columbus's so called "discovery" offered Spain tremendous opportunities for wealth, particularly from the mining of gold and silver. It also provided new soil for European plants like sugar, coffee, and rice. Conversely, crops developed by the Indian agriculturists, such as corn and potatoes, forever changed the European diet. In addition to introducing the horse and other livestock, the exchange also brought iron-age products from Europe to the New World, forever altering the way many native groups farmed, cooked, hunted, worked, played, dressed, and ate. The introduction of these animals, plants and implements changed the environment of the Americas forever. New livestock devoured the plentiful grasslands while foreign flora brought invasive weeds that destroyed native plants. Diseases joined the other "products" that made up the Intercontinental Exchange (also known as the "Columbian" Exchange). They unleashed epidemics that affected both sides of the Atlantic, but which hit the native population in America particularly hard. With the exchange of goods inevitably came the exchange of political ideas, economic systems (see VUS.3), and culture from continent to continent. While they did not always interpret their behavior correctly, European colonists contrasted Native American political structures, and the apparent freedom that the population tended to enjoy, with the monarchies of Europe.

Following Columbus' lead were countless conquistadors, mostly explorers who initiated other forms of cultural contact between the Spanish and the people of America and Africa in their quest for adventure and riches. In 1519, Hernán Cortés brought Spanish forces beyond the Caribbean into present-day Mexico. Eventually, he took over the Mexican capital Tenochtitlán in 1521 and launched a "scorched earth" policy. Cortés lived for a time with a multi-lingual native woman, a "gift" of a Mayan chief upon his arrival in the Yucatan. Their son was the "first mestizo "-a person of mixed race-in the hemisphere. This precedent of "race-mixing" characterized Spain as a more integrative society than that which would form further north in the English colonies. Later, when disease undermined its ability to use the local population as a labor force, Spain imported African slaves into the Caribbean. Africans often accompanied the Spanish conquistadors as guides and interpreters. They too mingled with the Spanish and native populations to create new racial categories distinctive to the Atlantic World.

Cortés was the first of many Spaniards searching for riches, adventure, and glory. These explorers and treasure-hunters first entered into the territory of what is now the United States through Florida, which they originally identified as an island like those of the Caribbean. Each sought to spread Spain's culture by colonizing the New World, frequently at their own expense. Tempting stories like that of the Fountain of Youth, often told to the Spaniards by captured Indians and slaves, spurred these adventurers to attempt repeatedly to conquer the land, as well as its native peoples.

Historian Herbert Eugene Bolton has credited the ineffective settlement of the Atlantic coastal lands to the area's lack of precious metals and the Indians' strong resistance to subjugation. Furthermore, England's defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588 further dissuaded Spain from pursuing settlement along the Atlantic coast and the empire turned its attention to today's American Southwest (then the northwestern reaches of the Spanish empire) for colonization. Explorer Cabeza de Vaca had already entered this territory inadvertently. A castaway from a failed Spanish expedition, de Vaca and his three companions, including an African slave named Estevan who served as a guide, interpreter, and diplomat, spent years living amongst the Indians on the Gulf of Mexico's western coast. They even went into the business of inter-tribal commerce, establishing an egalitarian relationship unusual for Spanish colonists. Eventually, de Vaca worked his way down through Texas to Sonora's Yaqui River where he met up with his fellow countrymen. De Vaca published his adventures, hoping to encourage a less severe and more tolerant Spanish policy toward Indians, but his stories of the Seven Cities of Gold led to the infamous Coronado expeditions, leading the Spanish into the territory of the Pueblos and as far north as the Great Plains.

In addition to a military force that became legendary, Spain used religious conversion as a means to organize and pacify the enemy and enlist them as an organized labor force (see VUS.3). The practice also furthered the power of the Catholic Church consistent with the Reconquista , a goal expressed by Columbus himself when he surmised that the Caribbean people would easily convert to Christianity. As early as 1510, Spain even justified conquest with a document they read to native people known as the Requerimiento , which emphasized Spain's divine right of conquest. The role of missions, therefore, became an institution equal to that of the Presidio (military fort) in the expansion of the Spanish Empire.

Spain's policies of conquest during this period encouraged a large degree of contact and conflict between Spaniards and Indians. The Pueblos, who lived on the far northern periphery of first the Aztec and then the Spanish Empire, incorporated some Catholic teachings but still maintained many aspects of their old lifestyle, and would only work for the Spanish as long as they received something in return. A century of Spanish rule gave the Indians protection from their enemies, many new tools and crops, and spiritual guidance. The more the Spanish insisted on suppressing traditionally native practices, however, the more the Indians resisted. The Pueblo (a.k.a. Popé's) Revolt in 1607 serves as one of the most profound examples of Indian resistance to Spanish conquest and policies of cultural intolerance. After a decade, the Spanish were able to again take control of the Pueblo territory known today as New Mexico, partly because the Pueblos desired protection from their Apache and Navajo enemies. However, they continued to hold tightly to many of their pre-Christian traditions and beliefs.

Indians Encounter the French

Like the Spanish, the French considered Indians worthy of conversion. Under French missionaries, however, Christianity tended to supplement the Indian way of life. Scholar Nancy Shoemaker has argued that Catholicism as taught by the French missionaries offered some Indian women new symbols of power. Also like the Spanish, the French sought a "society of inclusion," but enlisted the Indians as trading partners rather than as a labor supply. Between 1699 and 1754, relationships with the French tended to be interactive, probably because the French usually did not settle large numbers of people who challenged the Indian communities for resources. More common was the arrival of a few single, solitary men who initiated mutual trade. As historian Richard White describes, the two cultures met on more of a "middle ground," where groups engaged in mutual exploitation, and at least for a time, equitable relations. Each culture borrowed clothing styles and architectural techniques from the other, but contact introduced other profound cultural changes as well.

The most profound change in native life was that the Indians no longer worked only for purposes of subsistence. The French fur trade introduced iron-age products (iron, textiles, firearms, horses, and alcohol) to tribes across the west, who otherwise had very little contact with large groups of Europeans. It also altered tribal political relationships. Indians often negotiated between colonial rivals, particularly the French and English, by forming alliances with each side, while at the same time asserting their own independence. Some, like the Iroquois, developed more centralized governments in response to the colonial activities.

Indians Encounter the English

Motivated by the success of Spain and France in the Americas, England embarked on the settlement of the New World, though its initial efforts proved unsuccessful. English nobles were the first to try in the 1580s in Newfoundland and in Roanoke, Virginia. The English had a hard time subjugating a sparse native population and shunned Indian hospitality. Without the local aid, the Roanoke colony's strategy for survival has been described as one of "struggle and perish." Most inhabitants starved, died of disease, or were killed by Indian groups in violent encounters. Survivor stories prepared a future Virginia settlement in Jamestown on the Chesapeake Bay and in the southern colonies of South Carolina (see VUS.3).

The relationship between the Jamestown colonists and the Powhatan Confederacy foreshadowed the complex relationships between Indians and English in the Colonial Era. While the English repeatedly tried to assert power over the Indians, the Powhatans hoped to use the English to bolster their tribal standing in an environment of inter-tribal competition. As the Indians and English battled for dominance throughout the Chesapeake, each incorporated the goods and skills of the opposing culture into their own. The Indians quickly made use of iron-age implements such as kettles, fishhooks, guns, and knives. The English adopted Indian fishing techniques such as weir nets and canoes and learned how to cultivate successful crops. Yet in spite of the exchanges, the cultural and racial integration seen in the Spanish colonies was not generally duplicated in the English colonies.

From the descriptions of Columbus and others, European perceptions of Indians were at first generally favorable. Examining the complex relationship between Indians and early English colonists, Karen Kupperman notes that English writers on colonization described Indian societies as viable civilizations and regarded economic prosperity in the New World as a viable option. Potential colonists saw the native peoples as potential trading partners and friendly and receptive to European settlements. This positive view, however, contrasted with other descriptions of savagery that grew out of cultural assumptions and misunderstandings about gender roles, matrilineal societies, clothing, diet, religious worship, and most critically, notions of individual property ownership and land use. The English and the Indians each viewed one another through their own frames of reference and understandings of how human societies should function. All of this contributed to the marginalization of Indians from English colonial society. In light of the conflicting nature of English-Indian relations, the decimation of the Indian population through disease, and the increasing difficulty and expense of indentured servants, the English eventually turned to African slaves for labor.

Africans Come to America

The introduction of slavery brought the culture of Africa to America. Enslaved Africans were often carried to the coast from their homelands across central Africa. Their families, communal structures, and anything else familiar, disappeared as they were marched to the sea where African kingdoms, such as the Dahomey, negotiated their sale to the Europeans. Once in America, Africans worked as field laborers, explorers, soldiers, guides, and linguists. In the English colonies, they were generally confined to field labor and housework.

Most scholars of the slave system, including John Thornton and Ira Berlin, agree that Africans exercised limited control over the evolution of slave culture in America. Slaves brought with them a variety of languages, religious traditions, and agricultural skills; at the same time, they adapted to completely new and oppressive circumstances in dynamic and creative ways. Because they hailed from different ecological regions and cultures, the communities African slaves formed created a distinctive "African-American" culture evidenced through folktales, covert marital practices, songs and musical instruments (such as the drum and banjo), and the continuation of craftsmanship, such as basket-weaving. These practices were so well maintained that many of them found their way into the cultural mores of European colonists.

For the most part, African slaves interacted with one another or their European owners. These relationships frequently led to violent confrontations but also to physical intimacy (often forced but sometimes consensual). In some instances, Africans mingled with American Indians. Occasionally runaway slaves would find refuge with Indians tribes like the Seminoles in Florida. The two cultures shared much in terms of matrilineal societies, concepts of property, and tribal affiliations. Later, some southeastern Indian tribes, which adopted European farming practices, enlisted slaves into their societies as a labor force.

One of the most profound influences on African culture in America was Christianity. Scholars have long viewed the slave's adoption of Christianity as an ongoing process. In Many Thousands Gone , Ira Berlin reviews the dynamic evolution of the slave institution and its culture over several centuries. However, in Africa and Africans in the Making of the Atlantic World , John Thornton argued that conversion began en route from Africa: many slaves were thus already "Christianized" when they arrived in North America. While African religions varied, they tended to agree with one another about notions of a Supreme Creator, lesser gods associated with natural forces, and the power of deceased ancestors to influence daily life. Yet Africans also believed in a world beyond life, and therefore funerary practices incorporated Christian aspects. Christianity also offered slaves hope through promises of redemption and stories of freedom such as in the Book of Exodus. While many southern masters did not encourage such Christian instruction, missionaries in the northern English colonies introduced these ideas in the early eighteenth century during the first of many religious revivals known as the Great Awakening.

Unlike the primarily economic motivations for settlement in and south of the Chesapeake area, religion was the reason for the establishment of the English colonies in the northeast. In 1517, Martin Luther of present-day Germany had spurred vast numbers of people to break from the Catholic Church due to disagreements about church hierarchy and policies on salvation. Known as the Protestant Reformation, the movement took many forms, but one of the most important followers proved to be England's King Henry VIII, who broke from the Catholic Church in order to obtain a divorce from his first wife and marry a Protestant. Their daughter, Elizabeth I, ruled England from 1558 to 1603 and oversaw religiously motivated wars against Catholics in France and Spain, and especially in Ireland. Indeed, the prominence of religion in the Spanish wars of conquest grew out of a desire to defend Catholicism against the Protestant challenge. The New World became a battlefield for Europe's religious schism.

In the 1620s, one group of critics known as Puritans, who believed that the Church of England still needed to "purify" itself of Catholic elements, felt so persecuted for their views that many crossed the Atlantic to establish a Christian utopia of congregational churches. Without the climate for large-scale agriculture, nor the motivation of economic interest, these new colonists had little need or desire to integrate Indians into their society. The northeastern tribes looked at the new English settlers as simply additional players in the inter-tribal warfare of the region. Prior to the establishment of successful colonies in the north, early explorers had introduced diseases that turned into epidemics, decimating much of the Indian population and leaving little chance of viable resistance to permanent settlement and land acquisition. The English colonists saw this tragedy as divine intervention and proof of their right to the land. However, native groups were still strong enough by the 1670s to resist English power and claims to land as seen in the uprising known as King Philip's (or Metacomet's) War.

"New Worlds for All"

Beginning in the fifteenth century, several worlds, driven by political, economic, and religious forces in Europe, Africa, the Americas, and the Middle East, met in America. The nature of this contact was often dictated by the colonizers and often overshadowed by violence and coercion. Increasingly, however, scholars have emphasized the maintenance of Indian and African culture throughout this process and the reciprocal nature of cultural exchange and influence. The colonization of America did not simply create a European "New World"; it unleashed forces that would forever alter the lives of Africans, American Indians, and of Europeans themselves.

Works Cited and Further Reading

Berlin, Ira. Many Thousands Gone: The First Two Centuries of Slavery in North America . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998.

Calloway, Colin. New Worlds for All: Indians, Europeans, and the Remaking of Early America . Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997.

Kupperman, Karen. Settling With the Indians: The Meeting of English and Indian Cultures in America, 1580-1640 . Rowman and Littlefield and J. M. Dent, 1980.

Nash, Gary B. Red, White, and Black: The Peoples of Early North America . 4th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2000.

Shoemaker, Nancy, ed. Negotiators of Change: Historical Perspectives on Native American Women . New York: Routledge, 1995.

John Thornton. Africa and Africans in the Making of the Atlantic World, 1400-1680 (2nd ed.), Cambridge University Press, 1998.

White, Richard. The Middle Ground: Indians, Empires, and Republics in the Great Lakes Region, 1650-1815 . Cambridge University Press, 1991.

• Search Menu
• Advance articles
• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access
• Why Publish with EHR?
• About The English Historical Review
• Editorial Board
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Dispatch Dates
• Books for Review
• Terms and Conditions
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

• < Previous

Spain, Europe and the Wider World, 1500–1800

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Antonio Feros, Spain, Europe and the Wider World, 1500–1800, The English Historical Review , Volume CXXV, Issue 517, December 2010, Pages 1529–1531, https://doi.org/10.1093/ehr/ceq351

• Permissions Icon Permissions

John Elliott is by far the most important and influential historian of the early modern Spanish world, and he is responsible for making the history of Spain better known to, and understood by, historians of other fields. Most historians who studied in the last thirty to forty years have read and enjoyed Imperial Spain (1963; rev. ante , lxxx [1965], 825–6) and Europe Divided, 1559–1598 (1968; rev. ante , lxxxv [1970], 406–7; 2000), or some of Elliott's other original studies of early modern Spain, court politics in Europe, and/or early modern European empires.

Author of several indispensable monographs, Elliott is also known for his stylish and creative essays. About twenty years ago, he published a collection of his essays from the 1970s and 1980s, Spain and its World, 1500–1700: Selected Essays (1989). His goals in this collection were, first, to put to rest the simplistic view of early modern Spain which still dominated the discipline, and, second, to examine the topic that at the time seemed to be at the centre of historians’ speculations: the reasons for, and stages of, Spanish decline. In this new collection of essays, originally published in the 1990s and early 2000s, Spain, Europe and the Wider World, 1500–1800 , there is some overlap but also many differences in the topics which Elliott addresses. The question of Spanish decline has almost disappeared, as has the need to justify why we should be interested in the history of early modern Spain. The words that best define the contents of this new collection are comparative, trans-regional and imperial. Although Spain continues to be central to Elliott's interests, so are Britain, Europe and, most importantly, the Atlantic World.

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

• Recommend to your Library

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 1477-4534
• Print ISSN 0013-8266
• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Visiting Sleeping Beauties: Reawakening Fashion?

You must join the virtual exhibition queue when you arrive. If capacity has been reached for the day, the queue will close early.

Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History Essays

Europe and the age of exploration.

Salvator Mundi

Albrecht Dürer

The Celestial Map- Northern Hemisphere

Astronomical table clock

Astronomicum Caesareum

Michael Ostendorfer

Mirror clock

Movement attributed to Master CR

Portable diptych sundial

Hans Tröschel the Elder

Celestial globe with clockwork

Gerhard Emmoser

The Celestial Globe-Southern Hemisphere

James Voorhies Department of European Paintings, The Metropolitan Museum of Art

October 2002

Artistic Encounters between Europe, Africa, Asia, and the Americas The great period of discovery from the latter half of the fifteenth through the sixteenth century is generally referred to as the Age of Exploration. It is exemplified by the Genoese navigator, Christopher Columbus (1451–1506), who undertook a voyage to the New World under the auspices of the Spanish monarchs, Isabella I of Castile (r. 1474–1504) and Ferdinand II of Aragon (r. 1479–1516). The Museum’s jerkin ( 26.196 ) and helmet ( 32.132 ) beautifully represent the type of clothing worn by the people of Spain during this period. The age is also recognized for the first English voyage around the world by Sir Francis Drake (ca. 1540–1596), who claimed the San Francisco Bay for Queen Elizabeth ; Vasco da Gama’s (ca. 1460–1524) voyage to India , making the Portuguese the first Europeans to sail to that country and leading to the exploration of the west coast of Africa; Bartolomeu Dias’ (ca. 1450–1500) discovery of the Cape of Good Hope; and Ferdinand Magellan’s (1480–1521) determined voyage to find a route through the Americas to the east, which ultimately led to discovery of the passage known today as the Strait of Magellan.

To learn more about the impact on the arts of contact between Europeans, Africans, and Indians, see  The Portuguese in Africa, 1415–1600 ,  Afro-Portuguese Ivories , African Christianity in Kongo , African Christianity in Ethiopia ,  The Art of the Mughals before 1600 , and the Visual Culture of the Atlantic World .

Scientific Advancements and the Arts in Europe In addition to the discovery and colonization of far off lands, these years were filled with major advances in cartography and navigational instruments, as well as in the study of anatomy and optics. The visual arts responded to scientific and technological developments with new ideas about the representation of man and his place in the world. For example, the formulation of the laws governing linear perspective by Filippo Brunelleschi (1377–1446) in the early fifteenth century, along with theories about idealized proportions of the human form, influenced artists such as Albrecht Dürer (1471–1528) and Leonardo da Vinci (1452–1519). Masters of illusionistic technique, Leonardo and Dürer created powerfully realistic images of corporeal forms by delicately rendering tendons, skin tissues, muscles, and bones, all of which demonstrate expertly refined anatomical understanding. Dürer’s unfinished Salvator Mundi ( 32.100.64 ), begun about 1505, provides a unique opportunity to see the artist’s underdrawing and, in the beautifully rendered sphere of the earth in Christ’s left hand, metaphorically suggests the connection of sacred art and the realms of science and geography.

Although the Museum does not have objects from this period specifically made for navigational purposes, its collection of superb instruments and clocks reflects the advancements in technology and interest in astronomy of the time, for instance Petrus Apianus’ Astronomicum Caesareum ( 25.17 ). This extraordinary Renaissance book contains equatoria supplied with paper volvelles, or rotating dials, that can be used for calculating positions of the planets on any given date as seen from a given terrestrial location. The celestial globe with clockwork ( 17.190.636 ) is another magnificent example of an aid for predicting astronomical events, in this case the location of stars as seen from a given place on earth at a given time and date. The globe also illustrates the sun’s apparent movement through the constellations of the zodiac.

Portable devices were also made for determining the time in a specific latitude. During the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries, the combination of compass and sundial became an aid for travelers. The ivory diptych sundial was a specialty of manufacturers in Nuremberg. The Museum’s example ( 03.21.38 ) features a multiplicity of functions that include giving the time in several systems of counting daylight hours, converting hours read by moonlight into sundial hours, predicting the nights that would be illuminated by the moon, and determining the dates of the movable feasts. It also has a small opening for inserting a weather vane in order to determine the direction of the wind, a feature useful for navigators. However, its primary use would have been meteorological.

Voorhies, James. “Europe and the Age of Exploration.” In Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History . New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2000–. http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/expl/hd_expl.htm (October 2002)

Further Reading

Levenson, Jay A., ed. Circa 1492: Art in the Age of Exploration . Exhibition catalogue. Washington, D.C.: National Gallery of Art, 1991.

Vezzosi, Alessandro. Leonardo da Vinci: The Mind of the Renaissance . New York: Abrams, 1997.

Additional Essays by James Voorhies

• Voorhies, James. “ Pablo Picasso (1881–1973) .” (October 2004)
• Voorhies, James. “ Francisco de Goya (1746–1828) and the Spanish Enlightenment .” (October 2003)
• Voorhies, James. “ Paul Cézanne (1839–1906) .” (October 2004)
• Voorhies, James. “ School of Paris .” (October 2004)
• Voorhies, James. “ Art of the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries in Naples .” (October 2003)
• Voorhies, James. “ Elizabethan England .” (October 2002)
• Voorhies, James. “ Alfred Stieglitz (1864–1946) and His Circle .” (October 2004)
• Voorhies, James. “ Fontainebleau .” (October 2002)
• Voorhies, James. “ Post-Impressionism .” (October 2004)
• Voorhies, James. “ Domestic Art in Renaissance Italy .” (October 2002)
• Voorhies, James. “ Surrealism .” (October 2004)

Related Essays

• Collecting for the Kunstkammer
• East and West: Chinese Export Porcelain
• European Exploration of the Pacific, 1600–1800
• The Portuguese in Africa, 1415–1600
• Trade Relations among European and African Nations
• Abraham and David Roentgen
• African Christianity in Ethiopia
• African Influences in Modern Art
• Anatomy in the Renaissance
• Arts of the Mission Schools in Mexico
• Astronomy and Astrology in the Medieval Islamic World
• Birds of the Andes
• Dualism in Andean Art
• European Clocks in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries
• Gold of the Indies
• The Holy Roman Empire and the Habsburgs, 1400–1600
• Islamic Art and Culture: The Venetian Perspective
• Ivory and Boxwood Carvings, 1450–1800
• Leonardo da Vinci (1452–1519)
• The Manila Galleon Trade (1565–1815)
• Orientalism in Nineteenth-Century Art
• Polychrome Sculpture in Spanish America
• The Solomon Islands
• Talavera de Puebla
• Venice and the Islamic World: Commercial Exchange, Diplomacy, and Religious Difference
• Visual Culture of the Atlantic World
• Central Europe (including Germany), 1400–1600 A.D.
• Florence and Central Italy, 1400–1600 A.D.
• Great Britain and Ireland, 1400–1600 A.D.
• Iberian Peninsula, 1400–1600 A.D.
• Venice and Northern Italy, 1400–1600 A.D.
• 15th Century A.D.
• 16th Century A.D.
• Architecture
• Astronomy / Astrology
• Cartography
• Central America
• Central Europe
• Colonial American Art
• Colonial Latin American Art
• European Decorative Arts
• Great Britain and Ireland
• Guinea Coast
• Iberian Peninsula
• Mesoamerican Art
• North America
• Printmaking
• Renaissance Art
• Scientific Instrument
• South America
• Southeast Asia
• Western Africa
• Western North Africa (The Maghrib)

Artist or Maker

• Apianus, Petrus
• Bos, Cornelis
• Dürer, Albrecht
• Emmoser, Gerhard
• Gevers, Johann Valentin
• Leonardo da Vinci
• Ostendorfer, Michael
• Troschel, Hans, the Elder
• Zündt, Matthias

Online Features

• 82nd & Fifth: “Celestial” by Clare Vincent
• MetCollects: “ Ceremonial ewer “

European Colonization of North America

European colonization of North America expanded through Spanish colonists establishing themselves in present-day Florida in the 1500s and English colonists doing so farther up the East Coast in the 1600s. North America’s Indigenous peoples preserved their cultures and dignity through this period, despite facing violent dispossession by the colonists; enslaved Africans did as well, amid the horrors of their forced transportation to North America and inhumane treatment by their enslavers.

Social Studies, U.S. History, Geography, Human Geography

Relations Between Europe and Latin America: In Search of New Agendas and Formats

Latest Publications

Banning Russian LNG transhipment in European ports: a pragmatic and effective measure

Beyond Strategy? Industrial Strategy and the Future of European Defence

France’s Eastern Zeitenwende?

Summary:  The countries of Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, seen traditionally as ‘natural partners’ and linked by a ‘strategic partnership’, have developed a new network of contacts and exchanges in tandem with the EU’s new role as a global player. But these relations between Latin America/Caribbean and the EU seem to have entered into a phase of stagnation.

Introduction

The countries of Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, seen traditionally as ‘natural partners’ and linked by a ‘strategic partnership’, have developed a new network of contacts and exchanges in tandem with the EU’s new role as a global player. But these relations between Latin America/Caribbean and the EU seem to have entered into a phase of stagnation. The situation has prompted the European Commission to reconsider the way it deals with a subcontinent that has moved into an era of growing diversity.[1] In order to boost ties with Latin America and the Caribbean, a region that brings together a large number of countries that are traditionally close to Europe, the EU has developed a web of special dialogue, forms of partnership, modes of access to the bloc and summits. It does all of this fully aware that, of the world’s regions, Latin America and the Caribbean is the one that has opened up most to the EU ‘inter-regional’ strategy.[2] In other words, it seeks a presence in international politics on the basis of arrangements very similar to the European experience with regionalisation.

However, in recent years the established arrangements for subregional integration have been in a situation of deadlock or reorganisation, so the EU is starting to need privileged and quality interlocutors in Latin America. At the same time, association agreements signed with Mexico (2000) and Chile (2002), which are in force, have not shown the dynamism that had been expected. As a result, it is clear that the EU’s desire to try to establish ‘NAFTA parity’ for European companies in these countries does not seem to be ambitious enough an incentive for substantial exchanges with Latin American counterparts. An essential tool for giving new momentum to the network of relations between the two regions has been summits of chiefs of state and government of the two sides, aspiring to high-profile, political accompaniment in a context of growing turbulence in international politics. However, this interest seems dominated by the perception of a growing split between objectives, results and resources earmarked for programmes announced by the Presidents. So it is a good idea to revise possible lines of action to reorient relations between the two regions.

Presidential Diplomacy: The Preferred Method in Relations between the EU and Latin America and the Caribbean

The decision to broaden the format of contact between the EU and Latin America/the Caribbean to an arrangement of presidential summits stems to some extent from France’s idea to place EU-Latin American relations on the same level as the summits held by the Latin American countries themselves. In this way the EU added a new element to the channels of special dialogue that already existed at the sub-regional level with Central America (the San José process), the Community of Andean Nations (CAN) and MERCOSUR, in addition to bilateral contacts with Chile and Mexico. If the idea behind these summits was to offer an opportunity for direct, personal contact between leaders, allow for flexibility beyond the established mechanisms of diplomatic bureaucracy and provide opportunities to generate new ideas and set up large audiences for issues of international interest[3], then these goals have been achieved only partially. The mere number of people attending the summits (34 representatives of Latin America and the Caribbean and, starting in 2007, 27 from the EU) makes it very difficult for leaders to establish personal relationships and air new ideas in a context of greater flexibility. Rather, it seems that the classic bureaucratic style of multilateral meetings is taking over these summits, sometimes limiting their effects to short-term media attention. The “summit effect” has been considered an essential element for promoting political, economic and cultural cooperation between the two regions, and as a direct consequence of this the number of issues to address is rising constantly. The immediate effect of this presidential diplomacy has been a centralization of foreign policy in the hands of presidents or heads of government with a politically headstrong nature, and the dramatic result has been that, in the absence of effective follow-up mechanisms, it has been up to the European Commission to take on the political costs of the impression shared by many that there is no real policy behind all the talk. 

It should come as no surprise that alternative groups have held parallel summits and fueled a feeling of opposition to the formal, full-blown ones. Therefore there is a need to reformulate the overall network of relations between the two sides in this “strategic partnership.” For this, the criteria that have been proposed are those of relevance, efficiency and organizational modalities[4]. In the EU-Latin America case, Félix Peña has detected the absence of “a common thread in the strategy followed by the two regions in the building of a transatlantic space.” Although one can consider a meeting of 60 heads of state or government to be important, one must also acknowledge that the decisions that come out of the summit have not had impact on the international scene or served to fashion the decisions of multinational companies. There has not been much efficiency in the implementation of the agreements reached, if one refers to the case of trade talks between the EU and MERCOSUR, which had been expected to conclude successfully in 2004. Following up on the commitments undertaken by the two sides (even though they may attend meetings in different capacities, as a union or states with little coordination in their foreign policy) is therefore a key element. It is also important to carry out an institutional overhaul in order to achieve higher levels of efficiency in presidential diplomacy.  

Fundamentals and dynamics of the biregional relationship

The reference to common norms and values as pillars of the relationship between the EU and Latin America/Caribbean has become common, reflecting the absence of more concrete foundations in the biregional relationship. The Madrid Summit (17-18 May, 2002) had sought to set out in an 83-point document these agreements as norms that should be points of departure for its deliberations. However, the call that the 54 heads of state or government meeting at the summit in Guadalajara, Mexico on 28-29 May, 2004 made with regard to multilateralism as the anchor for union between the two regions quickly vanished because of the negotiations on reforming the United Nations. Neither the European Union, nor the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean managed to make common proposals. Rather, subgroups dominated by national interests formed, and these were a far cry from the stated common denominator in Guadalajara.

So the strategic partnership between the EU and Latin America and the Caribbean is not deep-rooted enough for other global players to see it as having a major international role, above and beyond its symbolic importance. This diagnosis also reflects a situation of transition which the relationship is going through: since the first summit in Río de Janeiro on 28-29 June, 1999, both the internal dynamics in the two regions and the institutional framework in which the summits were to be held have changed. Opposing dynamics are detected because these are two collective players whose internal movements correspond to different chemistry as far as centripetal and centrifugal forces are concerned. While the EU has faced difficulties in the prolonged and continuous process of enlarging to 27 members — a process that featured an explicit call to consolidate internal mechanisms before taking on new members – in Latin America centrifugal forces seem to prevail, not just with respect to the existing regional entities (especially MERCOSUR and the Community of Andean Nations), but also with regard to what are the right models for development and state action that will raise people’s  living standards. The growing polarization between the followers of Hugo Chávez and the pragmatic line followed by Bachelet in Chile and Lula in Brazil involves tension that threatens prospects for a consolidated international presence for the countries of Latin America.

Among the factors that changed the internal dynamics of the players involved we should mention these:

• the EU’s enlargement from 15 to 27 members has stirred debate over the point at which future enlargement could clash with needs for internal consolidation of the bloc’s internal processes. Such a situation could lead to a phase of greater introspection in Europe, limiting its external interests to its own neighbors and the poles of dynamic development in Asia.
• The lack of pro-integration dynamics in Latin America and the Caribbean; both  MERCOSUR and the Community of Andean Nations (CAN in Spanish) have entered into deep phases of reorganization as a result of Venezuela’s decision to leave CAN and join MERCOSUR. At the same time, the Central American Integration System is not at its best because of the process of ratification of the CAFTA-DR free trade agreement with the United States, which has triggered resistance in many countries. The effects this will have on the region are hard to calculate.
• A growing mix of political and ideological orientations has been spreading through Latin America due to the so-called populist trend that emerged in many South American countries in elections held in 2005 and 2006. This new dynamic has resurrected debates and conflicts from the past over the role of the state, the quality of leadership and the direction of the region’s economies.
• The failure of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (ALCA in Spanish) proposed by U.S. President Bill Clinton in December 2004 at a summit in Miami. To some extent this plan had served as a competitive model for the EU as it worked to avoid losing more influence in Latin America.
• The de facto suspension of the so-called Washington Consensus, which had shaped economic policy in the Latin American region into a common pattern. For better or worse for the policies designed under this consensus, it led to development of solid international policies, even if the effects for everyday people were negative and these policies are now in the process of being rectified and corrected delays in the reaching of possible accords at the Doha round of talks within the World Trade Organization. This did not help lighten the biregional agenda with regard to trade and investment issues requiring a multilateral arrangement.
• The emergence of China as an attractive partner for economic diversification, especially for the countries of South America. Unlike the EU, China has not attached implicit or explicit conditions on its offers of cooperation.

Transformation of agendas and formats of biregional summits through presidential diplomacy

The summit process has had contradictory effects for the advancement of biregional relations. On one hand it has given high visibility to ties between the EU and Latin America and the Caribbean. But it has also led to “ad hoc multilateralism”, the result of politically headstrong behavior that is typical of this kind of high-level event, and this in turn has produced a wide gap between words and action.[5] A process of these characteristics has to aim to achieve high levels of efficiency, a focus on workable agendas and processes that are both transparent and effective. A quick review of past summits gives an idea of the abundance of agendas and formats.

The Rio summit of 1999: open agenda and format

The Rio Summit (1999) had been driven by an interest to cover all possible aspects of bilateral relations, from politics to economy, culture and education, with explicit omission of the security issue, especially military cooperation. The meeting ended with the Rio Declaration, a 69-point document that set general principles for relations between Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, and a document called “Priorities for Action” which established 55 priorities in all of the areas that had been debated. It became clear quickly that this agenda was not workable, especially because the summit process has no secretariat for follow-up. Rather, the executive functions are carried out by the European Commission. A biregional group of senior government officials was created in 1999 at a meeting in Tuusula and it grouped the priorities spelled out in Rio under 11 general sections. The idea was to have a consolidated agenda for subsequent summits. The goals outlined in the Tuusula agenda were to cooperate in international forums, protect human rights, promote the role of women, cooperate on the environment and in event of natural disasters, fight drug trafficking and illegal arms trafficking, encourage the establishment of a stable and dynamic economic and financial system at the world level, promote trade, cooperate in the areas of teaching, university studies, research and new technologies, protect cultural heritage, establish a common initiative in the area of the information society and support research, post-graduate studies and training in integration processes. 

Despite this initiative to reduce the possible areas of cooperation and dialogue, the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean showed great interest in moving ahead with the EU in negotiating free trade accords. The European Commission and Council responded to this interest with an offer of Association Agreements that would include free trade, political dialogue and development aid. Mexico became the first country to conclude the negotiations, and in October 2000 the Association Treaty between the European Union and Mexico took effect. Aside from economic negotiations, the European Commission placed special emphasis on developing programs to defend human rights (focusing especially on People’s Ombudsmen), the information society with the @lis program and the issue of social inequality.

The Madrid Summit (2002): Working the Fundamentals The Madrid Summit (2002) was characterized by an interest in advancing discussion and debate in order to consolidate and concentrate the biregional agenda. It was decided to reduce the number of issues to be dealt with, choosing to focus on democracy and security (the issue of greatest interest after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States); how to boost multilateralism and regional integration, social equity and sustainable development and cultural diversity and modernization. An evaluation report presented at the summit[6] details the activities carried out since the previous summit. However, the results tended more to reflect advances with regard to contacts and events. So the report highlights a lack of operational capacity in the agreements reached at the summit level. Still, the summit produced an 83-point declaration on “common values and positions” which can be considered at first glance as a formulation of the foundations of this very special relationship driving the strategic partnership. The text contains elements of this nature. However, most of them correspond to definitions of the political atmosphere, points that were already explained in other international forums, so nothing specific stands out about the relationship between Europe and Latin America. One might consider the greatest achievement at the Madrid summit to be the conclusion of negotiations for the Association Agreement between the EU and Chile. After the accord with Mexico, this activated another comprehensive agreement featuring a free-trade clause.

As for the format, one can discern a wide range of events and activities before and after the summit which displayed the interest of other parties in offering their ideas at the presidential meeting. Although they still lack the features of “parallel summits” and to a large extent stem from initiatives by the European Commission itself and the host government, these forums mark a first attempt broaden the deliberations to include non-state players.

The Guadalajara Summit (2004): Shrinking the agenda and a new format After taking in 10 new members, the EU attended the 3rd summit in Guadalajara, Mexico with representatives of 25 member states. This made it hard to establish personal contact among the heads of state and government because if each guest had simply attended and spoken for 10 minutes, there would have been a 10-hour, non-stop marathon of speeches.[7] This enlargement made it essential to modify the format of the meeting, so it was decided to form issue-specific working groups so as to allow all 58 leaders to participate in the debates. A third of the members of the United Nations were attending this summit, so it could have carried major weight on the international stage. But the forum failed to acquire this influence because of persistent problems seen at earlier meetings. The innovative idea of holding debate at six round tables, three for each of the pre-defined issues (multilateralism and social cohesion) opened up enough space for the dignitaries to speak, but did not allow them to move toward more tangible results. The final statement of 104 points, 30 of which referred to multilateralism and 65 to social cohesion, was again an expression of the difficulties in relations between the EU and Latin American and the Caribbean. 

The Vienna Summit (2006): a transitional summit? In the largest meeting of heads of state or government in Austria’s capital since the Congress of Vienna in 1815, 58 dignitaries gathered there for the 4th summit between the European Union and the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean on 11-12 May, 2006. Taking part in this meeting were the secretary general of the United Nations and representatives of regional organizations, the president of the European Commission and four of his commissioners, and the president of the European Parliament. With this kind of turnout, it should come as no surprise that the Vienna Declaration was composed of 24 pages and repeated accords reached at earlier summits, without being able to resolve the underlying problems.

With more than 250 bilateral meetings in three days, the results could be summed up in the words of Austrian host Wolfgang Schüssel: “everyone talked to everyone.” The request by the leaders that the biregional process produce results and not get bogged down in speeches reflects dissatisfaction with the format of the summits, which will have to be reformed in order to improve the process. Despite this concern, the Vienna Declaration did not manage to define a U.N.-style road map for strategic partnership. It included particular points of interest but did not advance toward a framework and common message of general characteristics.

Although EU-Latin American trade reached a record 125 billion euros in 2005, commercial exchanges between the two regions remain at modest levels. Of all of Latin American trade, the EU accounts for just 12 %, and Latin America has only a 5.6% share of the EU’s trade volume. This situation lags far behind the dynamics that exist in other markets (especially trade with China and other countries of Asia). The grand goals of strategic partnership sought by Europe and Latin America and the Caribbean are hard to detect in this scenario. The EU-Latin American Business Forum, held as a side meeting for business leaders, urged leaders to set as an objective the doubling of biregional trade by the year 2012. But the leaders did not include such a commitment in the final statement.

The decision to start negotiations on an Association Treaty with Central America and possibly with the CAN expresses a clear message as to the interest in extending free trade between the two regions. The Business Forum’s suggestion to double foreign investment by the year 2012 was not embraced by the presidents. This comes as no surprise, given the recent nationalizations in Bolivia and the pressure exerted on foreign investors in some countries of the region. Criticism of “easy populism”, both from Mexican President Vicente Fox and the president of the European Commission, José Manuel Durao Barroso, took aim at the policies followed by Hugo Chávez, Néstor Kirchner and Evo Morales. But soon this criticism was accompanied by a statement issued from Europe to the effect that the bloc did not want to exclude these countries.

Not much interest was stirred either by Spain’s call for more collaboration from middle-income countries to achieve the Millennium Goals, which seem to get further and further from being met. The Vienna Declaration also made only a very lukewarm mention of the pending negotiations between the EU and MERCOSUR for an overall trade agreement; it only said that both sides “give negotiators a mandate to intensify efforts to advance in the negotiation process.” In this way it is evident that the process is deadlocked and subject to talks in the WTO, and will recover its dynamism only when debate is concluded in this multilateral forum (one way or another). From it there might emerge a biregional negotiation that is more committed to reaching an agreement in 2007, but there is the added complication of having Venezuela as a new member of MERCOSUR. And it is not clear what time frame Venezuela has for embracing MERCOSUR´s regulations and modifying its external tariff duties.

Over and above the biregional agenda, some issues did draw a consensus. It is noteworthy that for the first time a statement issued at an EU-Latin America summit made direct mention of Cuba and the Helms-Burton Law over the extra-territorial effects of U.S. trade policy. This can be interpreted as an important victory for Cuban diplomacy, which centred its attention at the summit almost exclusively on this issue. It will be important to observe how the EU defines a common position in the face of the internal dynamics that could arise in the Castro regime when the EU´s policy comes up for a review.

The Vienna Declaration’s mentions of the energy issue are also important. On one hand the leaders acknowledged the right to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, an issue of interest given the plans announced by Brazil. But they also referred to the energy grid connection plans announced by Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Mexico and Venezuela, and called on international and regional financial organizations to encourage investment in this project. It is here that a test will be made of the willingness of the countries involved to offer sufficient guarantees to possible investors from outside the region in the establishment of these networks. Finally, a plan was announced to extend ministerial and inter-parliamentary cooperation with the convening of a meeting of environment ministers from the two regions and acceptance of a proposal from the European Parliament to create a Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly.

The European Commission’s Proposal – on the way to an enhanced partnership? All these results fall far short of the proposals the European Commission had outlined in its “Communication to the Council” in December 2005. Entitled “A strengthened partnership between the European Union and Latin America”[8], it was issued prior to the Vienna summit and aimed to introduce a differentiated approach for its colleagues from Latin America and the Caribbean by giving more presence ”to emerging countries which play an increasing role in the Latin American region and at the world level.” With this orientation the commission acknowledged that the earlier approach of strict inter-regionalism no longer suited the new dynamics of Latin America and the Caribbean. This is not just because of the centrifugal forces that exist currently, but also because of the mere fact that the negotiations that began in 1999 with MERCOSUR have yielded no results so far. This made the EU’s relations with Brazil contingent on a future accord. With the new focus the commission aims to energize its relations with the South American giant, which it called “a country for which the Union only has meager structures for bilateral dialogue that are lacking a political dimension.” Recognizing the growing diversity of Latin America as a reference point and acknowledging the existence of new institutions such as the South American Community of Nations (CASA in Spanish) the idea is to broaden instruments of exchange in formats that are more flexible and country-specific. The commission thus foresees “more individualized relations with certain countries on specific policies and through dialogues with better-defined objectives. At an operational level, the desire is to use political dialogue to enhance exchanges at the level of senior officials, both in the troika format and with certain countries, depending on what is needed. With its communication the commission aims to “reaffirm that the Partnership with Latin America is not just evidence but also an imperative in the interest of both regions, now and in the future. But if Europe is prepared to increase its commitment to Latin America, it expects the latter to respond with a strong commitment. ”

This last statement in particular is a clear signal to the EU’s counterparts in Latin America for them to take on a more coordinated and ambitious internal commitment in order to match the intentions of the EU. However, the absence of a response from Latin America in the sense that was expected seems to be driving the European bid for a more differentiated offer of exchanges — one that does not just seem to reflect the new reality of middle-income countries or “anchor countries” as an expression of the new heterogeneity of Latin America. Rather, in an analysis of the motives for this expression of European discontent one would have to include Europe’s acknowledgment of its failure to impose a rigid model of inter-regionalism given the characteristics of regionalism in Latin America. 

In its response to the communication by the commission, the European Council, in its session No. 2711 of 27 February, 2006, accepted the two central proposals of the commission on the universal criterion (not excluding any region or country) and its differentiated character. The council said it “recognized the need for genuine, well-adapted political dialogue with the region as a whole, with the diverse sub-regions, and with individual countries, using existing structures as much as possible.” At the same time it accepted the commission’s proposal to hold efficient sectorial dialogue, especially on issues involving the environment and social cohesion. This statement also stems from an interest in achieving a greater level of coherence, coordination and complementarity on the issue of development aid – a key source of frustration among both Europeans and Latin Americans because of a lack of coordination between EU programs and those of member states.

Thematic innovation: evolution of the concept of “social cohesion”

Introduced as a central issue at the Guadalajara Summit (2002), the concept of  social cohesion  has drawn an unexpected amount of attention at Euro-Latin American forums and, beyond these, as a new formula for orienting cooperation. The final statement at the Guadalajara refers to it in its point No. 39, trying to embrace it as a common denominator for fighting poverty, social exclusion and inequality – phenomena to which both sides want to dedicate their greatest attention. In Latin America, the EU’s mention of this idea was seen as signaling the possibility of the bloc’s extending its policies of structural and cohesion funds to the Americas on the basis of an enlargement of the European social model. However, it quickly became clear that Europe’s intentions did not point in this direction. Rather, it aimed to focus on inequality in the region in the context of the Millennium Development Goals. Therefore the the EuroSociAL program proposed by the European Commission is of very short scope in the exchange of experiences among government agencies responsible for administering justice, education, employment, tax policy and health. In its programming for cooperation, the EU has singled out this issue as a fundamental one in its budget. With funding of  36 million euros, the budget for this program seems rather modest. Latin America is worried that the EU might be trying to use this issue as leverage in the free trade negotiations. 

So far efforts appear to be under way to achieve consensus on social cohesion because even though it is often mentioned, the idea lacks a clear definition. Interest in using this debate to support Latin America and achieve greater domestic social balance is quite timely, if it is possible to fund these initiatives with sufficient resources and binding commitments from European and Latin American governments. The political nature of the issue is clear, if one takes governments’ positions seriously. Therefore, if it were possible to shift the current debate to a conceptual and operational consensus in the framework of European and Latin American relations, there might emerge from this “partnership” an important added-value that is recognizable in international relations. The way this issue is treated in the future will be key to how Euro-Latin American relations develop.

Innovative elements with regard to format: more forums for debate

The Vienna Summit expressed a new reality. The pre-summit process and the massive turnout at the parallel events added a new element to this gathering of leaders. With some 10 pre-summit conferences organized by the European Commission, the European Parliament, member countries and organizations from civil society, many activities were staged that aimed to accompany the summit process and take on a certain role in defining beforehand the agenda and issues to be discussed. Unfortunately, so far all this has been done in a very informal and not very clear way in terms of who is invited, and these events are not strictly linked to the decision-making at the summit. So in the future it will be essential to find some kind of channel for these meetings to be connected more visibly with the deliberations of the leaders themselves. The first Euro-Latin American Business Forum and an alternative summit (it was called a “Social Gathering Linking Alternatives”) which was attended by the presidents of Bolivia and Venezuela and the vice president of Cuba gave a different tone to the routine diplomacy of summits. Following the example that the president of Venezuela set at the Summit of the Americas in Mar de Plata, Argentina by linking the official meeting with his participation in the alternative summit and thus attending simultaneously to contradictory agendas, it has become clear that the political staging of these events has been a key element. This is due to a large extent to the loss of intimacy among the presidents themselves. They barely manage to engage in conversations (aside from their bilateral talks) in a format of working groups, which was implemented for the first time at the Guadalajara summit in 2004. Because of the interest of the leaders of Bolivia, Cuba and Venezuela in making an impact on alternative audiences and media, a “double agenda” for the summits (official and alternative) has been established. This desire means Europe has to think about its procedures for dealing with Latin America: this new factor in the Euro-Latin American process involves reworking the concept of summit diplomacy. Excess political zeal for “ad hoc multilateralism” has given rise to a double summit arena and double agenda, undermining the legitimacy of the deliberations that take place during the summit process. Agreements reached are losing their already tenuous binding nature, and they lend themselves to contradictory readings and re-interpretations. In order to halt this tendency, it will be necessary to enhance the character of the commitments undertaken by the parties and design ways for them to be executed.

However, it is clear that the Euro-Latin American process has to open up to the interests of civil society in its various expressions: a deliberative format like the one the EU held with the European Constitution could be a way to advance in the Euro-Latin American framework, keeping in mind that this model would not only enrich and broaden the debate but also accentuate the risk of conflict.

Elements of disruption: internal conflicts in Latin America

This time protagonism went to the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean in terms of displaying the domestic, centrifugal forces of the subcontinent. It seemed like Vienna was hosting a Latin American summit on European territory. This meant that occasionally debate with the European Union was only of secondary importance; the bloc simply had to sit back and observe the internal arguments of the Latin American countries. Despite what had been planned, nationalizations in Argentina, Bolivia, Ecuador and Venezuela became the central issue at the summit, not just with regard to the European countries directly affected (Spain and France), but also the neighboring countries of Bolivia that were surprised by the measure announced by President Evo Morales on 1 May, 2006. In the same way the new dynamic of the “Latin American left” had repercussions for the cherished goal of the Community of the Andean Nations not to miss an opportunity to start negotiations with the EU on an association agreement, to which Bolivia consented at the last minute, but on condition that a common position would not be defined until late July. Venezuela’s departure from the CAN and a similar statement from the Bolivian government to the effect it wanted to quit this sub-regional forum for integration left the rest of the member states – Colombia, Ecuador and Peru – in the difficult position of seeing themselves cut off from the treatment the EU decided to give to Central America as far an announcement of bilateral negotiations on an association agreement. This step would have denied them a more systematic link with the EU for future years.  In the Central American case the EU achieved its objective of advancing with its idea of inter-regionalism in its ties with Latin America and the Caribbean. Panama had to declare its intention to become a member of the Central American integration organization SIECA in order to be considered as part of a strategic partnership between the EU and Central America. With this decision the European Council can move ahead in defining a mandate for the European Commission with the goal of launching meetings to negotiate a biregional Association Treaty.

The same palpable sensitivity among the Latin American participants was perceived in conflicts between the president of Bolivia, Evo Morales, and the outgoing president of Peru, Alejandro Toledo, and the absence of contact between the presidents of Argentina and Uruguay. Argentine President Néstor Kirchner took up environmental issues and criticized Europe in the paper mill dispute with neighboring Uruguay, saying it had sent companies that would cause pollution and disrupt relations with its neighbor. The Argentine-Uruguayan dispute also meant that the meeting with MERCOSUR could not be held at the presidential level and had to be replaced by one with foreign ministers.

The protagonism of  Hugo Chávez and Evo Morales  Latin America’s presence at the Vienna summit was marked by rivalries between nations. The European side tried to show interest in giving a higher profile to the new president of Chile, Michelle Bachelet, pointing to her country as a model for political and economic success and one that, in the worlds of Austrian Foreign Minister Wolfgang Schüsel, is moving “in the right direction.” The rise of 115% in trade between Chile and the European Union in 2003 and the growth of European investment in this country – to a total of 60% of all foreign investment in Chile – is for the European Commission proof of the success that an overall agreement with the EU can bring. The Chilean president called attention to her country’s participation in the European military contingent in Bosnia and the presence of the United Nations in Cyprus, describing the EU as her country’s most important partner outside Latin America. However, the summit could not reflect this Chilean example or showcase its president among all the other Latin American leaders. Although Europe supports it, the search for an “influential role” for that country in the Latin American region is for now limited because of a variety of conflicts Chile has with its neighbours. 

Meanwhile, much attention was drawn by the presence of Hugo Chávez and Evo Morales. They made clear that they had no plans to yield to criticism of their political model. Rather, they proclaimed an end to “neo-liberalism” and focused on the innovative trends they have devised in order to define the future of their peoples and the subcontinent. In summary, one can discern that pro-market discourse has been banished from Euro-Latin American summits and replaced by the conviction that, in the words of the president of Peru, “poverty conspires against democracy”. This reopens debate on the idea of democracy in the region. A paragraph on democratic development in the final statement issued at the Vienna summit is noteworthy: “We reaffirm that, although democracies share common characteristics, there is no single model for democracy and it is not exclusive of any one country or region.” This assertion can only be seen as odd given the much-publicized sets of values that exist in the two regions. It seems that on this issue a channel of discussion is being opened between Europe and Latin America so as not to stray from their common values. Observers were not surprised that criticism of “populism” did not show up in the final statement. Nor were they shocked by Brazil’s call for Europe to cut farm subsidies and give a political boost to the negotiations within the World Trade Organization. However, it is very clear that the distance in multilateral trade issues between Europe and Latin America, led here by Brazil, are still great. Brazil’s leadership in South America is weakening and not just because of the economic cost and lost of prestige from the nationalization of the hydrocarbon industry in Bolivia; President “Lula” was immersed in an undeclared election campaign, with serious domestic corruption problems. This prevented him from taking a lead role at the summit. When the president of Bolivia went on to resurrect the historical dispute over the Brazilian state of Acre, which Bolivia ceded to Brazil in 1903, it was clear Bolivia wanted to hinder Lula’s role as a conciliator at this summit.    

European leaders were worried that the summit might take on an anti-integration and anti-globalization tone because of statements by the president of Venezuela. But this did not happen in the end thanks to the positions adopted by most of the leaders of the region. The parallel summit served as a good forum for airing these arguments to an audience that hailed the leaders of the “new trend” in Latin America. Their speeches were brimming with accusations regarding “colonial structures” of the “neo-liberal empire” or the “lack of morality” of the EU in events in Iraq and Iran.

From Austria (2006) to Peru (2008) The importance of the process carried out between summits

Although this 4th summit was the first meeting of heads of state and government from Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean to be held in a country that was not part of Iberoamerica, participants praised the work of Austria and its determination to stage successfully a summit characterized by low expectations. The relative success of the agreements reached leaves the Euro-Latin American process alive, but failed to give it enough momentum to move forward on its own. Rather, this process needs to take seriously the work carried out in between the summits, which includes an important agenda of issues for the two sides to resolve.

(1) Latin America today is not a major priority for most European countries. This is especially true for the 12 new members of the EU. Therefore there is no need to act as a regional group in the framework of Euro-Latin American relations. What are recommended are formats that achieve differentiated participation from the most active players, both in Europe and in Latin America and the Caribbean.

(2)  Both regions are in a difficult phase internally: the EU because of the still-unresolved failure of its constitutional treaty, and Latin America because of domestic, centrifugal forces that could lead to stagnation or, in the case of the CAN, the disappearance altogether of subregional integration arrangements. At the same time Venezuela is seen as a new subregional force that is changing the balance of power in South America. This phase of inner soul-searching in both regions calls for effective mechanisms of political dialogue, but this appears to be absent from the institutional structure set up by the Rio Group and subregional integration arrangements. Therefore in the periods between summits it will be necessary to develop formats of flexible geometry to keep up dialogue with the main powers of the subregion with an eye to keeping the EU present and its member states focused on defining the political future of Latin America. Both the South American Community of Nations and the Iberoamerican process have limitations as to how much they can serve as a substitute: the former because of an absence of internal political definition, and the latter because of an insufficient European slant to its deliberations. Therefore, the European Parliament, Commission and interested member states of the EU are very close to defining variable and efficient procedures for deepening dialogue with Latin America in a central phase of its internal definition or redefinition.

(3) The diplomacy of these summits runs the risk of being thwarted by two factors that are strategic for the future development of relations between Europe and Latin America:

• The absence of an adequate arrangement for civil society to participate in economic development and processes of cooperation or political dialogue. It is precisely this richer and broader dimension of the exchanges between Europe and Latin America that could be a solution to the growing lack of interest between the two sides. It is here that a greater effort must be made to take the summit process closer to civil society, for instance through multi-theme forums that might serve as preparations for the summits. This would allow for longer periods between the summits and thus lighten the agenda facing the leaders.
• The diplomacy of the summits is suffering a high level of rhetoric and limited commitment in the implementation of the agreements reached. It is essential to find a bi-regional executive structure for the summits so they can implement the agreements that are reached. For now there is only the European Commission which serves to some extent as a body for implementation, and this is only a unilateral procedure. Therefore, in the “between summit process” a common proposal from Latin America and the Caribbean must be found so they can join in the task of executing decisions and agreements through a Euro-Latin American body. One reference point might be the Iberoamerican General Secretariat, although this body seems to take on a role that is much more political in nature than execution-oriented. The idea of strengthening the executive dimension might have a solution in the format of a “double Troika”, appointing representative from the EU on one hand and from Latin America and the Caribbean on the other.

(4) Despite the declarations coming out of the summits, relations between the EU and Latin America and the Caribbean are still concentrated on just these two sides. Outside parties do not detect a “subsystem” at the international level because the agenda is still limited to the bilateralism of the two parties. Extending this relationship to the international realm is subject to the features of the two regional players: neither the EU nor Latin America and the Caribbean act as a group at the international and multilateral level. The EU’s office for foreign policy and common security (PESC in Spanish) limits itself to trade policy in the framework of the WTO (as far as the mandate can be interpreted), but this does not work in the setting of the United Nations or in other global issues. To a large extent, the states of Latin America tend to act unilaterally on the international stage, without seeking coordination in their foreign policies. If the joint statement in favor of multilateralism aspired to be more than just talk, then it would be necessary to embrace that effort to achieve greater cooperation between the two regions in the multilateral arena. So it is necessary to identify those international areas in which there are efforts to unify positions between the two regions and in this way make the strategic partnership between them recognizable. In this way, be it through environmental policy or international security, there could be effective cooperation and coordination in the “between summit process” for the two regions to produce tangible results in the biregional relationship. Even if it were difficult to achieve such a commitment from all the participants, it would be a good idea to strengthen alliances among members in order to enhance the much-cherished community of values.

The EU relationship with Latin America – needs for a change in strategy

The presence of proposals to revitalize the biregional relationship through formats (opening new areas of participation and more differentiated ways of inter-relation) and agendas (with social cohesion as a key element) could lead to timely deliberations by the two sides on jointly developing new access to their mutual interests. However, the EU must realize that the new presence of China on the sub-continent has caused a profound change in this privileged partnership. It has had an impact on Latin America’s perception of what Europe has to offer, even if the impact is not yet highly visible. Despite all the reserved and even critical evaluations of this situation’s benefits for Latin America over the mid-term, one must consider this element as the impetus for developing a new profile for relations between Europe and Latin America. In the current international situation, Europe is no longer something that the countries of South America need, but rather an option they can pursue or not pursue. This is also the case for presidential diplomacy and the self-perception of the roles that the two sides want to take in the future of their relationship with each other.

The EU has traditionally seen its role on the international scene as one of exerting “soft power” that seeks to pass on its history of integration as an example to other parts of the world. The EU has thus become a model, and extending this was endorsed as a foreign policy tool for the union, as a “regional laboratory for global governance.” The advances in its internal development include “shared sovereignties” and the permanent development of common interests among member states. These are elements that facilitate creation of a successful example as to how to serve as the most ambitious cooperation project in the world, at the same time offering the best opportunity to develop answers to the challenges of globalization and have timely instruments for forging solutions for transnational governance.[9]

But this exemplary role does not necessarily carry the weight the EU would desire in Latin America. Some no longer accept the role of the European Union as the external promoter of integration on the sub-continent. Rather, other concepts of integration have begun to develop, such as the South American Community of Nations (CASA), fueled by a state-centered vision and one of closed markets. Therefore the EU has to revise its policies if its idea of trade-based integration is to be applicable in Latin America. It might be that the South American sub-continent is favoring physical and infrastructure integration, treatment of asymmetries and social issues, to the detriment of institutional development. Although the challenges of a shift in strategy are considerable, given the rather heterogeneous domestic panorama in the  countries of South America (especially when the current wealth of natural resources ends), the EU will have to prepare its strategic action in a different context on the different fronts of political dialogue, development aid and trade.

Günther Maihold Deputy Director of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP) Berlin, Germany

Bibliographical References

CEPAL, AECI & SGI (2007),  Social Cohesion. Inclusion and a Sense of Belonging in Latin America and the Caribbean,  CEPAL, Santiago de Chile.

European Commission (2006),  A Strengthened Partnership Between the European Union and Latin America. Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament , Com (2005) 636 final, Luxembourg.

European Commission,  Vienna Summit EU/LAC. EU-Latin America and the Caribbean ,  http://ec.europa.eu/world/lac-vienna/index_es.htm .

Council of the European Union (2006),  Council  C onclusions on EU-Latin America Relations , 2711st General Affairs Council Meeting, Brussels, 27 February.

Cotler, Julio (Ed.) (2006), S ocial Cohesion on the Agenda of Latin America and the European Union , IEP, OBREAL & CAN, Lima.

Freres, C., & J.A. Sanahuja (2006), ‘Toward a New Strategy in Relations Between the European Union and Latin America’, in C. Freres & J.A. Sanahuja (Coords.),  Latin America and the European Union. Strategies for a Necessary Partnership , Icaria, Barcelona, p. 23-104.

FRIDE (2006),  The European-Latin American Summit in Vienna , Democracy in context, nr 2, Madrid.

Grabendorff, W., & R. Seidelmann (Eds.) (2005),  Relations Between the European Union and Latin America. Biregionalism in a Changing Global System , Nomos, Baden-Baden.

Maihold, G. (2006a),  The Vienna Summit between Latin America/Caribbean and the EU: The Relative Success of a Meeting with Low Expectations , ARI nr 59/2006, Elcano Royal Institute, Madrid.

Maihold, G. (2006b),  Nach dem Wiener Gipfel. Europas schwierige Suche nach einem besonderen Verhältnis zu Lateinamerika , Ibero-Analysen nr 19, IAI, Berlin.

Messner, D. (2007),  The European Union: Protagonist of a Multilateral World Order or Peripheral Power in the ‘Asia-Pacific’ Century? , Nueva Sociedad, Buenos Aires.

Peña, F. (2005), ‘The Complex Network of Presidential Summits. Reflections on Multilateral and Multi-space Presidential Diplomacy in South America’,  América Latina Hoy , vol. 40.

Rojas Aravena, F. (2000),  Multilateralism: Latin American Perspectives , Nueva Sociedad, Caracas.

Whitehead, L., & A. Barahona de Brito (2005), ‘World Summits and their Latin American Versions: Making a Mountain out of a Molehill?’,  América Latina Hoy,  vol. 40.

[1] Freres & Sanahuja (2006).

[2] See studies in Grabendorff & Seidelmann (2005).

[3] These elements developed by Whitehead & Barahona de Brito (2005), p. 17.

[4] Peña (2005), p. 32.

[5] Aravena (2000).

[6]   http://ec.europa.eu/world/lac/conc_es/infev.htm .

[7] Whitehead & Barahona de Brito (2005), p. 16.

[8] European Commission (2006); the proposal does not include the Caribbean.

[9] Messner (2007).

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Solar Storm Intensifies, Filling Skies With Northern Lights

Officials warned of potential blackouts or interference with navigation and communication systems this weekend, as well as auroras as far south as Southern California or Texas.

By Katrina Miller and Judson Jones

Katrina Miller reports on space and astronomy and Judson Jones is a meteorologist.

A dramatic blast from the sun set off the highest-level geomagnetic storm in Earth’s atmosphere on Friday that is expected to make the northern lights visible as far south as Florida and Southern California and could interfere with power grids, communications and navigations system.

It is the strongest such storm to reach Earth since Halloween of 2003. That one was strong enough to create power outages in Sweden and damage transformers in South Africa.

The effects could continue through the weekend as a steady stream of emissions from the sun continues to bombard the planet’s magnetic field.

The solar activity is so powerful that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which monitors space weather, issued an unusual storm watch for the first time in 19 years, which was then upgraded to a warning. The agency began observing outbursts on the sun’s surface on Wednesday, with at least five heading in the direction of Earth.

“What we’re expecting over the next couple of days should be more significant than what we’ve seen certainly so far,” Mike Bettwy, the operations chief at NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center, said at a news conference on Friday morning.

For people in many places, the most visible part of the storm will be the northern lights, known also as auroras. But authorities and companies will also be on the lookout for the event’s effects on infrastructure, like global positioning systems, radio communications and even electrical power.

While the northern lights are most often seen in higher latitudes closer to the North Pole, people in many more parts of the world are already getting a show this weekend that could last through the early part of next week.

As Friday turned to Saturday in Europe, people across the continent described skies hued in a mottling of colors.

Alfredo Carpineti , an astrophysicist, journalist and author in North London, saw them with his husband from the rooftop of their apartment building.

“It is incredible to be able to see the aurora directly from one’s own backyard,” he said. “I was hoping to maybe catch a glimpse of green on the horizon, but it was all across the sky in both green and purple.”

Here’s what you need to know about this weekend’s solar event.

How will the storm affect people on Earth?

A geomagnetic storm watch or warning indicates that space weather may affect critical infrastructure on or orbiting near Earth. It may introduce additional current into systems, which could damage pipelines, railroad tracks and power lines.

According to Joe Llama, an astronomer at Lowell Observatory, communications that rely on high frequency radio waves, such as ham radio and commercial aviation , are most likely to suffer. That means it is unlikely that your cellphone or car radio, which depend on much higher frequency radio waves, will conk out.

Still, it is possible for blackouts to occur. As with any power outage, you can prepare by keeping your devices charged and having access to backup batteries, generators and radio.

The most notable solar storm recorded in history occurred in 1859. Known as the Carrington Event, it lasted for nearly a week, creating aurora that stretched down to Hawaii and Central America and impacting hundreds of thousands of miles of telegraph lines.

But that was technology of the 19th century, used before scientists fully understood how solar activity disrupted Earth’s atmosphere and communication systems.

“That was an extreme level event,” said Shawn Dahl, a forecaster at NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center. “We are not anticipating that.”

Unlike tornado watches and warnings, the target audience for NOAA’s announcements is not the public.

“For most people here on planet Earth, they won’t have to do anything,” said Rob Steenburgh, a space scientist at NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center.

The goal of the announcements is to give agencies and companies that operate this infrastructure time to put protection measures in place to mitigate any effects.

“If everything is working like it should, the grid will be stable and they’ll be able to go about their daily lives,” Mr. Steenburgh said.

Will I be able to see the northern lights?

It is possible that the northern lights may grace the skies this week over places that don’t usually see them. The best visibility is outside the bright lights of cities.

Clouds or stormy weather could pose a problem in some places. But if the skies are clear, even well south of where the aurora is forecast to take place, snap a picture or record a video with your cellphone. The sensor on the camera is more sensitive to the wavelengths produced by the aurora and may produce an image you can’t see with the naked eye.

Another opportunity could be viewing sunspots during the daytime, if your skies are clear. As always, do not look directly at the sun without protection. But if you still have your eclipse glasses lying around from the April 8 event, you may try to use them to try to spot the cluster of sunspots causing the activity.

How strong is the current geomagnetic storm?

Giant explosions on the surface of the sun, known as coronal mass ejections, send streams of energetic particles into space. But the sun is large, and such outbursts may not cross our planet as it travels around the star. But when these particles create a disturbance in Earth’s magnetic field, it is known as a geomagnetic storm.

NOAA classifies these storms on a “G” scale of 1 to 5, with G1 being minor and G5 being extreme. The most extreme storms can cause widespread blackouts and damage to infrastructure on Earth. Satellites may also have trouble orienting themselves or sending or receiving information during these events.

The current storm is classified as G5, or “extreme.” It is caused by a cluster of sunspots — dark, cool regions on the solar surface — that is about 16 times the diameter of Earth. The cluster is flaring and ejecting material every six to 12 hours.

“We anticipate that we’re going to get one shock after another through the weekend,” said Brent Gordon, chief of the space weather services branch at NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center.

Why is this happening now?

The sun’s activity ebbs and flows on an 11-year cycle, and right now, it is approaching a solar maximum. Three other severe geomagnetic storms have been observed so far in the current activity cycle, which began in December 2019, but none were predicted to cause effects strong enough on Earth to warrant a watch or warning announcement.

The cluster of sunspots generating the current storm is the largest seen in this solar cycle, NOAA officials said. They added that the activity in this cycle has outperformed initial predictions .

More flares and expulsions from this cluster are expected, but because of the sun’s rotation the cluster will be oriented in a position less likely to affect Earth. In the coming weeks, the sunspots may appear again on the left side of the sun, but it is difficult for scientists to predict whether this will cause another bout of activity.

“Usually, these don’t come around packing as much of a punch as they did originally,” Mr. Dahl said. “But time will tell on that.”

Jonathan O’Callaghan contributed reporting from London.

An earlier version of this article misstated the radio frequencies used by cellphones and car radios. They are higher frequencies, not low.

How we handle corrections

Katrina Miller is a science reporting fellow for The Times. She recently earned her Ph.D. in particle physics from the University of Chicago. More about Katrina Miller

Judson Jones is a meteorologist and reporter for The Times who forecasts and covers extreme weather. More about Judson Jones

What’s Up in Space and Astronomy

Keep track of things going on in our solar system and all around the universe..

Never miss an eclipse, a meteor shower, a rocket launch or any other 2024 event  that’s out of this world with  our space and astronomy calendar .

A dramatic blast from the sun  set off the highest-level geomagnetic storm in Earth’s atmosphere, making the northern lights visible around the world .

With the help of Google Cloud, scientists who hunt killer asteroids churned through hundreds of thousands of images of the night sky to reveal 27,500 overlooked space rocks in the solar system .

A celestial image, an Impressionistic swirl of color in the center of the Milky Way, represents a first step toward understanding the role of magnetic fields  in the cycle of stellar death and rebirth.

Scientists may have discovered a major flaw in their understanding of dark energy, a mysterious cosmic force . That could be good news for the fate of the universe.

Is Pluto a planet? And what is a planet, anyway? Test your knowledge here .

Take the Quiz: Find the Best State for You »

What's the best state for you ».

Spain Denied Port of Call to Ship Carrying Arms to Israel

FILE PHOTO: Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares makes a statement during a press conference at the State Department in Washington, U.S., May 10, 2024. REUTERS/Kaylee Greenlee Beal/File Photo

(This May 16 story has been corrected to fix the name of the ship operator from Danica Maritime to H. Folmer & Co in paragraph 5)

MADRID (Reuters) - Spain has refused permission for an Israel-bound ship carrying arms to call at the southeastern port of Cartagena, Transport Minister Oscar Puente said on Thursday.

The Marianne Danica was carrying a cargo of arms to Israel and had requested permission to call at Cartagena on May 21, Puente said on X.

It was carrying nearly 27 tons in explosive material from India's Madras, El Pais reported.

War in Israel and Gaza

The Foreign Ministry, which Puente said denied the authorisation, did not immediately reply to repeated requests for comment.

H. Folmer & Co, the company operating the Marianne Danica, did not immediately reply to a request for comment.

The reports come amid a spat between the ruling Socialists and their hard-left partners over allowing the transit of vessels carrying arms to Israeli ports.

(Reporting by David Latona and Charlie Devereux; Editing by Josie Kao)

Copyright 2024 Thomson Reuters .

Photos You Should See - May 2024

Join the Conversation

Tags: Israel , India , Middle East , Europe , Spain

America 2024

Health News Bulletin

Stay informed on the latest news on health and COVID-19 from the editors at U.S. News & World Report.

Sign in to manage your newsletters »

Sign up to receive the latest updates from U.S News & World Report and our trusted partners and sponsors. By clicking submit, you are agreeing to our Terms and Conditions & Privacy Policy .

You May Also Like

The 10 worst presidents.

U.S. News Staff Feb. 23, 2024

Cartoons on President Donald Trump

Feb. 1, 2017, at 1:24 p.m.

Photos: Obama Behind the Scenes

April 8, 2022

Photos: Who Supports Joe Biden?

March 11, 2020

Flag Display Rattles SCOTUS Experts

Lauren Camera May 17, 2024

Will Trump Testify in His Own Trial?

Laura Mannweiler May 17, 2024

Viral House Spat Shows Chaotic Congress

Aneeta Mathur-Ashton May 17, 2024

QUOTES: Trump on Gun Control Policy

Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder May 17, 2024

Leading Indicators: Economy Is Softening

Tim Smart May 17, 2024

Key Moments From Cohen Cross-Examination

Laura Mannweiler May 16, 2024