Turning Brothers into Enemies? Resentment in Atlantic Revolutions

• Autores: María Lucana-Giraldo
• Localización: On Resentment.: An Interdisciplinary Workshop on The History of Emotions, 26,27, 28 October, 2011 The Louis-Jeantet Auditorium, Geneva / coord. por Dolores Martín Moruno, Javier Moscoso Sarabia, Bernardino Fantini, 2011, pág. 12
• Idioma: español
• Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
• Resumen

  • Emotional categories are historical constructions. In History, some emotions have been related to "primitives", others to "civilized" peoples. By means of explanation, we can argue there is even a connection between certain emotions and the so-called -in different periods, in different manners- "spirits of the age". That is, a social acceptance of certain emotions and a refusal of others. This adaptation of a category -anger, fear, happiness, resentment- to a concrete context can afford important explanations to what the emotions "are" and what in fact "represent". The study of emotions in the Eighteenth Century can give us a glimpse of the transition from Ancien regime to modern societies and individuals. The role of resentment is a key issue in this debate, because the idea of political revolution was invented at that time. At least in the Western World, change only could be obtained until that century of Enlightenment by means of reform, a restoration of old virtues, the only moral values that could be imagined. World was perfect as such, as created by God. Everybody was given a place at birth and it was for ever. Social mobility was related to the acceptance of rules. Revolts, jacqueries, mutinies were, first and utmost, an offence against nature, an act of madness, although explanation and remedy through mercy of kings and queens could sometimes arrive, once the restoration of order had been achieved. But by 1700 the so-called "Battle of the books" in England, the "Querelle" in France, or the "novatores" in Spain, changed once and for all the discussion about the meaning of political virtues. If the preeminence of the Ancient Greeks and Romans over the "people of an enlightened age" was not accepted, tradition was not venerated. Ancients were not wiser than Moderns. And the imitation of classics was not the only way to establish a fair political regime. In a sudden, something really new could be imagined and the political meaning of revolution to destroy monarchies and republics was conceivable. In this context, resentment was a key element conveying a credible explanation of the justice and opportunity of its cause. From then on, resentment conveys individuality, built up public opinions, or expresses a moral economy of modern multitudes. Resentment explains revolution; it works as a self-fulfilling prophecy. But it must be taken into account generalizations are difficult. In the age of Atlantic revolutions, from the independence of United States in 1776 to the French Revolution in 1789, the Haitian Revolution and the foundation of the first "Black republic of the world" there in 1804, or the independence of Portuguese and Spanish America, concluded in 1824, very different resentments were at work. To begin with, in the Ancien regime there was a channel to express resentment without breaking the rules. The "memorial of grievances" expressed the break of the social contract by certain unfair rulers, turned into despots. In certain conditions, as in some Jesuit political treaties, like that of father Mariana, it could be justified the assassination of a king. The declaration of the independence of United States is a memorial of grievances and sufferings of the colonists under the government of the unfair king George III. Rebellion was organized and justified to make justice. But there was nothing new; the king had broken the contract, the Atlantic constitution of the British Empire. So in the end political independence was gained in 1783, but the virtuous foundation of a republic of planters and traders did not affect the social model. On the contrary, it was reinforced. The French revolution was a different matter; strong social issues were in the agenda. As Marc Ferro recently pointed out, between 1789 and 1793 the revolution was against the king, against the aristocrats, against the rich. Violence and revenge were justified by resentment, an emotion in principle appropriated by revolutionaries, and then by those opposed to changes. The Haitian case was different because on the other side of the Atlantic ethnicity was a key element; 85% of the population of Saint-Domingue in 1790 were slaves. Resentment could not explain anything, because nothing was in need of explanation for rebel slaves - or its masters-. Social mobility did not exist in proper sense, although there was a small group of free mulattoes. Finally, resentment in the revolutions of independence of Spanish and Portuguese America worked as a combination of political and social issues. On the one hand, it served the creole elites to explain and justify a rebellion against the kings and the monarchies due to supposedly postponements and injustices. On the other, it served mixed races, free blacks, slaves and poor whites, to convey their political aspirations to social and not only political changes.