Certain parts of Venezuela, especially around Maracaibo and in what some people call Spanish Guyana (the areas of Venezuela close to British Guyana) come to my mind. Also the region around the Chiloé Archipelago in modern Chile was a royalist stronghold, too. There might be more, but those are the ones that immediately spring to my mind.
Mexico - the royalists were so strong, they took over at independence, which is why Mexico had such a rough period of national consolidation even after the Spanish sailed away.
Cuba and Puerto Rico, obviously; the Domincan Republic, since the royalists actually took them back under the Spanish flag for a period in the 1860s.
Best,
Both of your answers are really helpful, thanks. My second question then is would it be plausible for the Royalists to maintain control of Central America south of Mexico and north of Panama, keeping it under Spanish control for longer?
Both of your answers are really helpful, thanks. My second question then is would it be plausible for the Royalists to maintain control of Central America south of Mexico and north of Panama, keeping it under Spanish control for longer?
Eh... that was mostly Pedro Santana and Buenaventura Baez, who after the failure of the 1850s harnesses the support of the elites to go back to the Spanish fold. Partially for defense and partially to cement their control (which is funny because they had less power under the Spanish government).Mexico - the royalists were so strong, they took over at independence, which is why Mexico had such a rough period of national consolidation even after the Spanish sailed away.
Cuba and Puerto Rico, obviously; the Dominican Republic, since the royalists actually took them back under the Spanish flag for a period in the 1860s.
Best,
Eh... that was mostly Pedro Santana and Buenaventura Baez, who after the failure of the 1850s harnesses the support of the elites to go back to the Spanish fold. Partially for defense and partially to cement their control (which is funny because they had less power under the Spanish government).
The old school Trinitarios loyal to a republic due to the conservative government in Spain.
Eh... that was mostly Pedro Santana and Buenaventura Baez, who after the failure of the 1850s harnesses the support of the elites to go back to the Spanish fold. Partially for defense and partially to cement their control (which is funny because they had less power under the Spanish government).
The old school Trinitarios loyal to a republic due to the conservative government in Spain.
I think most of Spanish America was accepting of being under Spanish rule. Only a few key areas were eager to attain independence. Sans the fiasco in the home country of having two Bourbon kings forcibly given the boot and an interloper Bonaparte trying to hold onto the crown while the entirety of Spain erupted as a battleground, you probably don't see much of an independence movement for quite a while. The locals (as opposed to the mother country) having to defend Buenos Aires from the British didn't help either. But even in Argentina, Buenos Aires had to forcibly convince the other provinces to boot out the Spanish.
Gurroruo,
there was the beginnings of a movement, which hadn't gone to rebellion stage prior to the peninsular war. at minimum, Miranda in Venezuela was trying to convince Britain to back his movement, and Buenos Aires was thinking about it after the attempted British invasions. There was certainly a lot of discontent. I doubt it would have gone to any serious rebellion stage if it weren't for the peninsular war, but there was some smoldering desire.
Representatives from Charcas and other provinces of what's currently southern Bolivia where part of the assembly that declared Argentine independence in 1816.Another place with strong royalst support was Alto Perú/ Charkas. They pushed back several rioplatense incurssions. Basically a large part of the local indigineous majority distrusted more the criollos than they distrusted the crown.