Content deleted Content added
sfn first of lawrence sources |
m sfn fixes |
||
Line 165:
In addition, Carlism did not represent a rural fight against urban development, as "[urban] artisans threatened by recurrent Liberal abolition of the guilds and redundant officeholders (cesantes) could be drawn to Carlism, whilst, by contrast, villagers who had benefited from the Liberal property revolution would correspondingly turn Cristino;<ref>{{Cite book |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/891678 |title=Historia de España Alfaguara |date=1973 |publisher=Alianza Editorial, Alfaguara |others=Miguel Artola |isbn=84-206-2998-7 |location=Madrid] |pages=90–112 |oclc=891678}}</ref> flight either from or to the countryside in many cases entrenched a rural (Carlist) versus urban (Cristino) divide, but as an effect rather than a cause of the conflict."{{sfn|Lawrence|2014|p=18}}
It is highly likely that there were nobles outside of the three Carlist "heartlands" that were in favour of his cause, but any public show of support would have resulted in the Cristino court banishing those nobles from Madrid and seizing their extensive lands and income.
Overall, the Carlist position can be summarized as a radical reactionary policy to restore the privileges of the church and nobles, decentralise legislative and judicial powers, and bring the monarchy to a more medieval role that was less absolutist and more dependent on nobles. "In other words, the Carlists wanted to revise not just the recent Liberal revolution but the entire eighteenth-century legacy of enlightened absolutism."{{sfn|Lawrence|2014|p=37}}
Line 176:
It is important to note that the liberals were just as multi-faceted as the Carlists, carrying on the factionalism that had characterized them during the Peninsular War.{{sfn|Lawrence|2014|p=21}} They disagreed in regards to military, with the ''guerilleros'' (patriot guerilla bands), the Bourbon army, and the National militia (a part-time citizen's force organized at a local level and "in the hands of property owners" which was written into the Constitution yet saw only "ephemeral" involvement at the end of the Napoleonic war) all favored by different politicians and at different times both before and during the war. The national militia was championed by the Liberals during the Trienio, but required a literacy test and ability to afford the uniform from those enlisted.{{sfn|Lawrence|2014|p=22}} However, they received the same privileges and immunity as the military while having as only requirement the condition of "when active in their duties"<ref>{{Cite book |last=Casamayor XXXVII |first=B.U.Z |title=21 April 1820 transcription of Junta Gubernativa resolution to establish National Militia |year=1820}}</ref> which led to significant in-fighting and an "extra-paramilitary double regime" during the Trienio.{{sfn|Lawrence|2014|p=29}}
The growing anti-militarist sentiment amongst the liberals resulted in the emergence in the Napoleonic War amongst the army of a faction that "was hostile to the whole constitutional experiment" due to the "shabby treatment" received from politicians.
The Liberal generals, such as [[Vicente Genaro de Quesada]] and [[Marcelino de Oraá Lecumberri]], were often veterans of the [[Peninsular War]], or of the wars resulting from independence movements in [[South America]]. For instance, [[Jerónimo Valdés]] participated in the [[battle of Ayacucho]] (1824).
| |||