Navarrese electoral Carlism during the Restoration

Navarre

Carlism was the dominant political movement in elections in Navarre during the period between the Third Carlist War (ended 1876) and the Primo de Rivera dictatorship (began 1923). The movement, defeated in 1876, during the Restauración period recalibrated its focus from military action to political means and media campaigns. Accommodating themselves to political framework of the Alfonsine monarchy, party leaders considered elections, and especially elections to Cortes Generales, primary vehicle of political mobilization. Navarre turned out to be the Carlist electoral stronghold; it elected 35% of all Carlist deputies voted into the parliament during almost 50 years of the monarchical liberal democracy. Though the phenomenon remained marginal from the national Spanish perspective, political prowess of Carlism in the province was key to sustain its potential until the movement regained momentum during the Second Spanish Republic.

Electoral system

Electoral districts, 19th century

During the entire Restauración period Navarre was divided into 5 electoral districts, territorially roughly corresponding to the existing judicial districts;[1] 4 of them (Estella, Aoiz, Tafalla and Tudela) were categorized as “distritos rurales” with one mandate each, and 1 (Pamplona) enjoyed the status of a “circunscripción” with 3 mandates available. In both types of districts mandates were assigned according to the first-past-the-post system. In the 20th century the comarca of Améscoas was moved from the Pamplona district to the Estella district.[2]

Electoral districts, 20th century

Until the 1886 elections the eligible voters (around 19.000, some 6% of the population) were males above 25 years of age with appropriate material status.[3] Starting the 1891 campaign the rights were granted to all males above 25 years, which increased the number of potential voters to around 64.000 people (some 21% of the population).[4]

Spanish elections of the Restauración are marked by 2 distinct features: turnismo and caciquismo. According to the turnista routine, elections were organized by one of two rotating pre-appointed parties, Conservatives and Liberals, to ensure their parliamentary majority; the objective was achieved by a wide range of electoral manipulations known as pucherazos.[5] Caciquismo was the system of political corruption based on networks of local party bosses.[6] In Navarre both features were in play, though their efficiency decreased over time and varied across the province, with countryside usually more prone to electoral fraud.[7]

Navarre and Spain

Carlist deputies. Navarre in blue

Navarre elected 35% (50 out of 144) Traditionalist deputies voted in during the Restauración, though the ratio varied across almost half a century in question.[8] Through the 1880s the province was trailing behind with no mandate won, while single seats were occasionally conquered in Guipuzcoa, Álava and Vizcay. In the 1890s and from 1916 onwards Navarrese deputies to the Cortes formed some 30-40% of the entire Traditionalist minority.[9] From 1903 to 1914 the Navarrese heavily dominated in the group of Carlist deputies, in 1906 constituting the record 67% (4 out of 6). In absolute figures the most successful were the years of 1907 and 1910, when Traditionalists grabbed 6 out of 7 Navarrese seats available; during these terms they formed 1,5% of all deputies (otherwise usually ranging between 0,8% and 1,2%).

As the province voted in 50 Carlist deputies altogether, in terms of the legitimist zeal no other part of Spain stood comparison. Speaking in terms of the then existing regiones, two were somewhat behind, Vascongadas electing 44 deputies and Catalonia 23 deputies. Old Castile and Valencia won 11 seats each, and 5 were scattered across Asturias, Leon and Baleares. Not a single seat has been won in the capital, Madrid.

With 22 MPs Pamplona is topping the list of Spanish electoral districts with the highest number of Carlist deputies voted in; though the next in line are two Guipuzcoan districts, Estella (12 MPs) comes fourth and Aoiz (8 MPs) is fifth. Tafalla (5 MPs) still makes it to top ten, while Tudela (3 MPs) takes place mid-range, ahead of 18 districts which one time or another elected 1 or 2 Traditionalist deputies. The highest rate of success measured as percentage of seats won out of all seats available was recorded by two districts in Guipuzcoa, with Estella coming third (65%), Aoiz fourth (40%) and Pamplona sixth (37%).

Periodization

In terms of Carlist electoral history in Navarre, the era of 1879-1923[10] Navarre falls into 4 sub-periods, marked by different conditions, strategies, and above all, different results.[11] The period of 1879-1890 produced almost total electoral absence, 1891-1902 were the years of ascendance, 1903-1917 provided the Carlists with total domination and 1918-1923 demonstrated gradual eclipse.[12]

Navarrese deputies to Cortes

Military defeat suffered in 1876 paralyzed Carlist activities in the country, with press suspended, circulos closed and leaders exiled. Though structures of the party were being gradually rebuilt, until the late 1880s there were still neither Carlist electoral centers nor other comités organizados operating in Navarre.[13] Their first daily, El Tradicionalista, appeared as late as 1886,[14] and was complemented by La Lealtad Navarra[15] in 1888.[16] The party did not field any official candidates, though there were a few who demonstrated some sympathy for the Carlist cause.[17] Carlists tested their own strength in elections to Diputación Foral starting late 1870, but were unsuccessful until the late 1880s.[18] They first re-emerged as political group in local municipal elections, as in 1881[19] they were able to elect 8 concejales to the Pamplona ayuntamiento.[20]

Starting late 1880s Carlism assumed a structured modern shape[21] and the 1888 split of Traditionalism into mainstream Carlism and Integrism produced more aggressive policy of both groups. Though most 1891 candidates[22] were easily defeated,[23] the election of Sanz Escartín marked the beginning of Carlist march for later domination.[24] In 1893 the mainstream Carlists improved to two seats,[25] though Mella’s victory was marginal,[26] and the Integrist branch won one.[27] The elections marked also decline of the Liberals.[28] 1896 produced 3 seats. During the 1898 campaign the Carlists were probably overconfident;[29] Sanz and Mella got their tickets confirmed,[30] but Irigaray did not.[31] In 1899 Carlos VII ordered abstention[32] and called for boycott;[33] no individual candidate joined the race.[34] In 1901 the Carlists regained 2 seats in Pamplona and Estella, while Irigaray recorded the first victory in Aoiz.

During the 1903–1917 years both branches of Traditionalism won 29 out of 42 mandates available (69%) and the period is clearly marked by their supremacy. The only area beyond clear Carlist control was Ribera Baja, as in Tudela district they managed to win only 2 out of 6 mandates.[35] They emerged as an arbiter on the regional political scene, with other parties seeking their support. In many elections of that age opponents did not even bother to compete.[36] The period is closed by the 1916 elections, when the Carlists changed alliance strategy in order to regain Tudela and Tafalla districts;[37] they succeeded only partially.[38]

The final phase falls on the years of 1918-1923. It is marked by disappearance of the Integrists and a strategy of pivotal tactical alliances at the expense of clear political line, which triggered internal conflict within mainstream Carlism.[39] The strategy did not produce the results expected; the Mellista secession added insult to injury, and the rise of new Basque, republican and socialist parties contributed to electoral decline of Carlism. During the last campaign of the Restauración in 1923 Jaime III ordered abstention, quoting disillusionment with the corrupted democracy.[40] Out of 4 Carlist-related candidates who decided to run individually,[41] only 2 were elected.

Program

Fueros monument, Pamplona

Initially the Carlists preferred not to compete on a highly partisan, ideology-driven program. Instead, their propaganda was calibrated to prove that only Traditionalism would be a genuine representative of local and provincial interests in Madrid.[42] It was the “Fueros” part of their ideario which was put on the forefront.[43] The defense of local interests remained the single most constant feature of mainstream Navarrese Carlism electoral buildup, though even calls for restoration of the pre-1841 separate establishments have never amounted to endorsement of autonomous designs either for the province or for the broader Vasco-Navarrese region. The issue remained a thorny question during the Alianza Foral period in the 1920s, undermining the Carlists-Nationalist concord and even producing internal divisions within Carlism itself.[44]

Another typical feature of Traditionalist propaganda were constant references to Christian values,[45] with mainstream Carlists competing against other groupings of the Right – most prominently the Integrists – to obtain support from the Catholic hierarchy, and if that proved unfeasible, than at least to get their Catholic credentials confirmed one way or another. Following Congreso Católico de Zaragoza in 1890, all candidates running as “Catholics” strived to obtain authorization of the bishops; the Carlists tried to obtain such a license exclusively and criticized alleged abuse and inflation of the term, granted by the bishops even to Liberal candidates.[46]

Carlist standard

In the 20th century the Carlist propaganda was increasingly saturated with diatribes aimed against political corruption (presented as inevitable consequence of liberalism), and even against the electoral system itself.[47] Another rising current was defense of legitimism, though references to dynastical claims were usually veiled and the party tried to avoid open challenge of the Alfonsist rule.[48] The campaigns of Carlist candidates, always ultra-conservative and anti-democratic, at the turn of the centuries became even more reactionary and included increasingly frequent calls to defend traditional values against “red revolution”.[49] In the late 1910s and early 1920s, with the Carlist policy of pivotal alliances in full swing, they sidelined ideological threads. It was the Integrists who excelled in lambasting the Jaimistas for allying with the arch-enemies Liberals.[50] Finally, the last years of Restauración were marked by outward rejection of the political system and “farsa parlamentaria”.[51]

Alliance policy: friends and foes

There was no concise, firm and continuous Carlist alliance policy during the Navarrese elections to the Cortes. The choice of friends and enemies stemmed from internal dynamics within Carlism in Spain, from political turns of the Carlist claimants, from local circumstances and from developments on the provincial and national political scene.

During the 1880s and most of the following decades the Liberals, victorious on the battlefields, remained the Carlist arch-enemies also at the polls. Refraining from fielding candidates themselves, the followers of Carlos VII sympathized with some Cortes hopefuls representing other groupings. One such group were the Conservatives; the most prominent of them was marqués de Vadillo,[52] considered a semi-Carlist candidate[53] and his cacique network occasionally dubbed carlo-vadillismo.[54] Other friendly candidates were the Fueristas, a group centered on autonomous and Catholic program.[55] With Carlist organization rebuilt, the electoral base of the Fueristas was gradually absorbed by the Traditionalists in the late 1880s.[56]

Carlos VII

The 1888 split between the breakaway Integristas of Ramón Nocedal and the mainstream Carlism loyal to Carlos VII produced bitter rivalry between both factions. Though in Navarre initially the two groups considered mutual support of their men,[57] they eventually fielded competitive candidates in 1891.[58] During the 1890s both groups considered each other primary enemy and contended with venomous hostility.[59] When the Integrists fielded no candidate (like in 1898) they refused to support any Carlist[60] and even backed their opponents.[61] The hostility turned into rapprochement in early 1899, when two factions agreed to co-operate in Guipuzcoa; the carlo-integrist alliance soon spread also to Navarre.[62] In 1899 both branches boycotted the elections, and in later campaigns they worked together.

Since the beginning of the 20th century Carlists emerged as arbiter on the regional political scene, and other parties were competing with each other seeking their support. The most stable turned out to be the alliances with the Integristas[63] and than the Mauristas, usually formed under a broad monarchist-Catholic-regional umbrella. As part of the deal, the three Pamplona mandates available were shared between a Carlist, an Integrist, and a Conservative,[64] as the Carlist allies enjoyed the privilege of a “second vote”.[65]

Around 1915 the Carlist alliance policy started to change, a result of complex haggling at local elections.[66] In 1916 the Carlists altered their strategy and preferred Liberals to Integrists as alliance partners in order to regain the Tudela and Tafalla districts.[67] The year marked also a new strategy of pivotal tactical alliances concluded at the expense of clear political line.[68] The one which enraged many was a coalition with the Liberals. An agreement with the Nationalists, initially intended for local balloting[69] but eventually applied to general elections,[70] also raised many eyebrows.[71] Finally, the Mellista secession divided Carlism further on.[72]

Geography

the core: from Artajona to Estella

Analysis of geographical distribution of Carlist support in Navarre reveals some general rules applicable through most of the Restauración period, though there were few shifting patterns traceable across specific parts of the province. In general, Carlism recorded the highest success ratio in the electoral district of Estella (won 60% of mandates available), followed by Aoiz (40%), Pamplona (37%), Tafalla (25%) and Tudela (15%).

Carlism enjoyed most support in the central zone of Navarre, covering the belt of Sierras Occidentales, Tierra Estella, Cuenca Pamplona, Navarra Media, Baja Montaña and partially Prepireneo, with the core formed by confluence of Pamplona, Estella and Tafalla districts, around Artajona,[73] Mendigorría, Larraga, Val de Mañeru[74] and Valdizarbe.[75] A major change within this central zone was gradual deterioration of Carlist vote at the southern edge of the belt, in Ribera Estellesa,[76] Northern municipalities of Ribera Arga and in Sierra de Ujué.[77]

loose grip: Pyrenees

The city of Pamplona was in the early 1890s dominated by the Carlists,[78] though by the end of the century their rivals shortened the distance and Sanz ceased to be the most popular deputy of the city;[79] also de Mella later in the 20th century had to concede the first place to a Maurista candidate. The trend proved stable and at some point Carlism lost its grip on the capital, as in 1931 Pamplona was one of few places in Navarre where the Carlist-Nationalist coalition lost to the Left.[80] The city of Estella witnessed the opposite pattern: initially Carlists suffered heavy defeats[81] and conquered the city only in the early 20th century, to keep winning also during the overall democratic triumph of 1931.[82]

The Northern belt of the province (Valles Cantábricos, Valles Meridionales, Precantabrico, Pirineos) was consistently less enthusiastic about Traditionalism. Until the late 1890s the movement fared rather badly in the mountains;[83] in Pirineos Orientales, dominated by the Valle de Roncal based Gayarre caciques,[84] the Carlists did not even bother to field a candidate. Over time they gained strength in Valles Meridionales, partially in Prepirineos[85] and Pirineos Orientales,[86] though their grip was less than firm.[87] Corredor del Araquil, in the 1890s loyal to legitimist cause,[88] was later conquered by the democrats.[89] Valles Cantábricos remained the Integrist stronghold,[90] though over time it was the Nationalists who set their foot in the area. In general, until the end of Restauración the Carlists did not dominate the Northern belt,[91] and it was sparse population density of this hilly region which worked to their advantage when aggregating the vote in the districts of Pamplona and Aoiz.

turning away: Ribera

The area which witnessed most visible change in terms of political preferences was the Southern belt (Ribera Alta, Ribera Arga, Ribera Aragón, Bardenas Reales, Ribera Baja). The municipalities along the Upper Ebro started to turn away from Carlism during the late 1890s.[92] The southern municipios of Estella and Tafalla districts, Ribera Arga and Ribera Aragón, including cities of Olite and Tafalla, were usually lukewarm to Carlism, with the only exception the years around 1910, when Bartolomé Feliu Pérez briefly managed to reverse the pattern.[93] Municipalities along the Lower Ebro did not display clear preferences until the 1910s,[94] though in Ribera Baja Carlism for decades maintained its insular fortress in the capital Tudela,[95] losing the city after 1910[96] and failing to retake it.[97] From then onwards, the entire Ribera Oriental was irreversibly slipping into the hands of Carlist enemies – mostly Republicans, though also the Socialists.[98]

Personalities

Joaquín Lloréns

There were 20 individuals elected as Carlist deputies from Navarre during the Restauración, plus an unspecified number of candidates who at least once ran for the Cortes, but have never been successful.[99] The two who stand head and shoulders above are non-Navarros, Joaquín Lloréns Fernández[100] and Juan Vázquez de Mella,[101] who served 8 terms each as Navarrese deputies in the Cortes.

Joaquín Lloréns Fernández (1854-1930) was a Levantine and a soldier, commanding the Carlist artillery during the Third Carlist War.[102] He commenced his parliamentary career elsewhere, but starting 1901 he was continuously 8 times elected from Estella; his position in the district was so dominant that no-one dared to confront him in the 1910-1916 period;[103] however, he was defeated in Estella by an albista candidate in 1919.[104] Juan Vázquez de Mella (1861-1928) was an Asturian and a leading Carlist theorist. Though he served 8 Navarrese terms in the Cortes,[105] he was elected only 7 times (3 times from Estella and 4 times from Pamplona), as in 1903 he replaced the successful candidate, Miguel Irigaray. Both were not typical cuñeros (cuckoo candidates), as over time they became deeply involved in local issues.

Juan Vázquez de Mella

The most notable local deputy was Romualdo Cesáreo Sanz Escartin, the Carlist general from Pamplona; he was the first Carlist MP elected in the province during Restauración, successful in his native city 5 times[106] and later serving also in the Senate.[107] The most elected Integrist candidate was José Sánchez Marco, representing Pamplona in 1907, 1910 and 1914; the other Integrists elected were Ramón Nocedal and Arturo Campión. The only deputy elected as independent Carlist was Justo Garrán Mosso, who ran when both Jaimistas and Integristas did not field official candidates.[108] Two cases when the national Carlist leaders competed in Navarre were these of Bartolomé Feliu Pérez in 1910[109] and Luis Hernando de Larramendi in 1920,[110] though there were local Navarrese leaders standing, like Simón Montoya Ortigosa (unsuccessfully) in the 1890s,[111] or Gabino Martínez Lope García (successfully) in the 1910s.[112] Two condes de Rodezno provided the only example of two generations - father and son - serving as Carlist Navarrese deputies.

The candidate who gathered the highest number of votes was de Mella in 1907 (13.341) and in 1914 (11.338); the threshold of 10.000 votes was exceeded also by Sanchez Marco in 1907 (10.166) and by Sanz in 1891 (10.003); due to size of the constituency, all were cases of the Pamplona district. In terms of the percentage of votes gained the primacy goes to Llorens Fernandez, who was supported by 99.51% of the voters in Estella in 1907.[113] Altogether there were 8 cases of Carlists gaining a mandate according to the notorious Article 29, i.e. with no counter-candidate standing: Lloréns from Estella in 1910, 1914 and 1916, Tomás Domínguez Romera from Aoiz in 1914, Vázquez de Mella and Sanchez Marco in 1910, Víctor Pradera in 1918 and Joaquín Baleztena in 1920 (all from Pamplona).

Success factors

Vascongadas peasants

The most popular group of theories evaluating the Carlist popularity (or lack of thereof) points to socio-economic conditions,[114] though scholars from this school might present contradictory conclusions.[115] The prevailing theory claims that Carlism thrived in rural areas with large commons and dominated by middle-size holdings, at least self-sustainable but usually able to enter the market exchange.[116] This type of units provided economic grounds for peasant owners, the social base of Carlism, and was frequent in the Northern belt of Spain, typical in most of Navarre.[117] Whenever this social group was giving way to owners of small, non-sustainable plots, landless peasants, tenants, rural workers and jornaleros – like was the case in the Navarrese Ribera, home to many local landowners – Carlism was losing its base. At the opposite edge of the province, in the Pyrenees, low soil fertility and short vegetation periods reduced efficiency of medium-size holdings, leading to land shortage and the resulting tension, partially defused by emigration. In case rural areas were industrialized, the ensuing social mobility was undermining traditional life patterns[118] and undercutting Carlist popularity, like is supposed to be the case of Corredor del Araquil.[119]

romería in Navarre

Another group of determinants listed is related to culture and religion. It is noted that Carlism was strongly related to religiosity, most fervent in the Northern provinces, and a dense parochial network, served mostly by clergymen originating from the same area, kept sustaining the movement.[120] Population groups demonstrating religious indifference or outward hostility, like socially mobile middle-class professionals dominating culturally and politically in urban communities, are held responsible for trailing Carlist popularity in the cities and around,[121] leading even to emergence of an anti-urban thread within Carlism.[122] Liberal influence of emigrees or returnees in the North, combined with first-hand experience of secular French state across the Pyrenees, is quoted as a possible reason for loose Traditionalist grip on the mountainous municipalities.[123]

Euzko Mendigoizale Batza emblem

One of the most controversial issues is correlation between Carlism and Basque nationalism. There is little doubt that until some point in time Carlism and Basque ethnic identity sustained each other, which helps to understand limited support for Carlism in the South-Eastern part of Navarre.[124] The discussion is mostly about when the two started to part,[125] to what extent Basque nationalism owes some of its characteristics[126] to Carlism, and to what extent the decline of Carlism resulted from its electorate having been taken over by Basque parties.[127]

Carlist historiography of the last decades seems marked by increasing skepticism towards socio-economic conditions being put on the forefront, now suspected of schematic Darwinism and oversimplifications. One reviewer underlines emergence of works focusing on "microsystems of daily life", like collective mentality, religious and moral values, anthropological factors, customs, family interaction patterns etc.[128] Another historiographer asks whether the new wave of works marks a return to politics as a primary analysis key.[129] This approach is yet to contribute to understanding the patterns of Carlist electoral results in Navarre.

See also

Footnotes

  1. ↑ César Layana Ilundáin, Elecciones generales en Navarra (1876-1890), Pamplona 1998, ISBN 8495075172, 9788495075178, pp. 65-92, Mina Apat, María Cruz, Elecciones y partidos en Navarra (1891-1923), [in:] José Luis Garcia Delgado (ed.), La España de la Restauración, Madrid 1985, ISBN 8432305111, pp. 111-113, Jesús María Zaratiegui Labiano, Efectos de la aplicación del sufragio universal en Navarra. Las elecciones generals de 1886 y 1891, [in:] Príncipe de Viana 57 (1996), pp. 186-7
  2. ↑ though none of the studies consulted suggests gerrymandering
  3. ↑ i.e. those who paid annual fees known as “contribución territorial” (rural areas, ca 17.5 thousand payers in 1886) or “subsidio industrial” (urban residents, around 1.5 thousand payers in 1886)
  4. ↑ see population and electorate numbers quoted by Zaratiegui 1996, pp. 178, 199
  5. ↑ see Rosa Ana Gutiérrez, Rafael Zurita, Renato Camurri, Elecciones y cultura política en España e Italia (1890-1923), Valencia 2003, ISBN 8437056721, 9788437056722
  6. ↑ see José Varela Ortega, El poder de la influencia : geografía del caciquismo en España: (1875-1923), Madrid 2001, ISBN 978-84-259-1152-1
  7. ↑ e.g. in the urban constituency of Pamplona the turnout in the 1890s was usually lower than in the countryside, which seems counter-intuitive. The most likely explanation is that in smaller towns and villages the turnout was inflated by electoral fraud, Zaratiegui 1996, p. 198. See also Angel Garcia-Sanz Marcotegui, Caciques y políticos forales. Las elecciones a la Diputación de Navarra (1877-1923), Pamplona 1992, ISBN 8460430294
  8. ↑ full data available at Indice Historico de Diputados, see here. In case of few deputies their political adscription is described differently, e.g. Ángel García-Sanz Marcotegui gives the number of 48 Carlist and Integrist deputies, see his Caciques y políticos forales: Las elecciones de la Diputación de Navarra (1877-1923), Pamplona 1992, p. 313
  9. ↑ except 1899, when the claimant Carlos VII ordered abstention and the party as organization refrained from taking part; only individual candidates were permitted: “no habrá diputados carlistas en las próximas elecciones, pero podrá haber carlistas diputados” see Jose María Remirez de Ganuza López, Las Elecciones Generales de 1898 y 1899 en Navarra, [in] Príncipe de Viana 49 (1988), ISSN 0032-8472, p. 382
  10. ↑ for the period where Carlism participated in elections as an organized force, i.e. for 1891-1923, all branches of Carlism formed 38% of all Navarrese deupties and 29% of all Navarrese senators, see Maria del Mar Larazza, Navarra, [in:] José Varela Ortega (ed.), El poder de la influencia: geografía del caciquismo en España (1875-1923), Madrid 2001, ISBN 8425911524, 9788425911521, p. 444,
  11. ↑ detailed reviews of selected campaigns in Zaratiegui 1996 (1886 and 1891), Remirez 1988 (1898 and 1899), María del Mar Larraza Micheltorena, Las elecciones legislatives de 1893: el comienzo del fin del control de los comicios por los gobiernos liberales, [in:] Principe de Viana 49 (1988), pp. 215-227, Sebastian Cerro Guerrero, Los resultados de las elecciones de diputados a Cortes de 1910 en Navarra, [in:] Principe de Viana 49 (1988), ISSN 0032-8472, Jesús María Fuente Langas, Elecciones de 1916 en Navarra, [in:] Príncipe de Viana 51 (1990), ISSN 0032-8472, pp. 947-957, pp. 93-106; also worthwhile studying Alberto Garcia Umbon, Elecciones y partidos politicos en Tudela 1931-1933, [in:] Príncipe de Viana, 50 (1989), ISSN 0032-8472, pp. 221-262, Elena Floristan Imizcoz, María Luisa Garde Etayo, El manifesto constitutive de la Alianza Foral (1921), [in:] Principe de Viana 49 (1988), pp. 147-154, Ana Serrano Moreno, Los resultados de las elecciones a Cortes Constituyentes de 1931 en el municipio de Pamplona: un análisis especial, [in:] Principe de Viana 49 (1988), pp. 457-464, Ana Serrano Moreno, Las elecciones a Cortes Constituyentes de 1931 en Navarra, [in:] Príncipe de Viana, 50 (1989), pp. 687-776, Angel Garcia-Sanz Marcotegui, Las elecciones de diputados forales en el distrito de Estella – Los Arcos (1877-1915), [in:] Príncipe de Viana 51 (1990), pp. 441-488, Angel Garcia-Sanz Marcotegui, Las elecciones municipales de Pamplona en la Restauración (1891-1923), Pamplona 1990, ISBN 978-84-235-0906-5
  12. ↑ slightly different periodisation is proposed for elections to local Diputación Foral: 1890-1903 (mainstream Carlists and Integrists controlled 35% of the mandates), 1905-1916 (68%) and 1917-1923 (25%), see García-Sanz Marcotegui 1992, p. 311; another proposal (into "caciquismo pleno" until 1896 and "caciquismo parcial" afterwards) in Stanley G. Payne, Navarra y el nacionalismo vasco en perspectiva historica, [in:] Principe de Viana 47 (1984), pp. 103-4
  13. ↑ Zaratiegui 1996, p. 180
  14. ↑ this Pamplonese daily was to be taken over by the rebellious Integrists two years later; it appeared between 1886 and 1893, Zaratiegui 1996, pp. 182-3, to be replaced by La Tradicion Navarra (1894-1932), see Imizcoz, Garde 1988, p. 149
  15. ↑ transformed in 1897 into El Pensamiento Navarro
  16. ↑ Zaratiegui 1996, p. 181-182
  17. ↑ Zaratiegui 1996 p. 187, Remirez 1988, pp. 361, 373
  18. ↑ Garcia-Sanz 1990, pp. 456, 459, 480
  19. ↑ running in alliance with the Fueristas as Unión Pamplonesa
  20. ↑ against 3 Liberals and 1 democrat , see Partido Fuerista entry at Gran Enciclopedia Navarra
  21. ↑ the work credited by some to Ramon Nocedal, see Jacek Bartyzel, Umierac ale powoli, Krakow 2006, ISBN 8386225742, pp. 273-274, and by some to marqués de Cerralbo, see Román Oyarzun Oyarzun, Historia del carlismo, Madrid 2008, ISBN 8497614488, 9788497614481, p. 433
  22. ↑ 4 Carlists and 1 Integrist, Zaratiegui 1996, p. 198-199
  23. ↑ except Estella, where the Carlist candidate lost marginally, Zaratiegui 1996, p. 199
  24. ↑ in terms of the number of votes across all Navarre, mainstream Carlists lost to Conservatvies at a rate of 1:1,5. Jointly with the Integrists, the Traditionalists lost to Conservatives 1:1,2, data in Zaratiegui 1996, p. 199
  25. ↑ for the first time having fielded 5 candidates in all 5 sub-districts, El Heraldo de Madrid, 6.3.1893: Cesareo Sanz (Pamplona), Bartolome Feliu Perez (Aoiz), Juan Vazquez de Mella (Estella), Miguel Irigaray (Tafalla) and Eduardo Castillo Pineiro (Tudela)
  26. ↑ Larraza 1998, p. 218; El Heraldo de Madrid, 6.3.1893 initially reported his defeat
  27. ↑ El Heraldo de Madrid, 6.3.1893
  28. ↑ organizing the elections, they were unable to produce the results desired , Larraza 1998, p. 217. The author also considers 1893 (not 1891) a turning point for the Carlists, p. 227
  29. ↑ as their candidates did not tour the constituencies until very last
  30. ↑ it is interesting to note that Mella lost in the city of Estella; his victory in the district was ensured thanks to votes in the countryside
  31. ↑ Irigaray failed to prolong his mandate in Tudela losing by a rate of 1:1,3, Remirez 1988, p. 372
  32. ↑ Carlist leaders pondered upon launching another insurgency and actually some have already started to prepare the uprising. The Silvela government reacted with preventive detentions and expulsions, resulting in the Carlist organizational network seriously debilitated. Finally Don Carlos decided to abstain, Remirez 1988, p. 382
  33. ↑ the analysis of votes on Carlist candidates in 1898 and the delta in abstention between 1898 and 1899 reveals material correlation especially in the city of Pamplona, though also in Amescoas, Tierra Estella and Valdizarbe, it is in the Carlist core of Navarre, Remirez 1988, 392
  34. ↑ Sanz initially announced he would compete but withdrew afterwards, Remirez 1988, p. 382
  35. ↑ in 1907 and 1910; in the partially Riberan district of Tafalla Carlists won 4 out of 6 mandates
  36. ↑ they were declared victorious according to the famous Article 29
  37. ↑ Fuente 1990, pp. 950-951
  38. ↑ from now onwards the entire Ribera Oriental, including the city of Tudela, was slipping firmy into the hands of Carlist rivals – mostly Republicans, than coming the Socialists. Carlists took the beating in 1931 (1:3), Garcia 1989, p. 238
  39. ↑ Imizcoz, Garde 1988, pp. 148-149
  40. ↑ see the letter from Jaime III to de Villores, ABC 13.03.1923; it might be suspected that the claimant preferred to avoid humiliating defeat of the party, heavily weakened by the Mellist secession
  41. ↑ ABC 23.3.1923
  42. ↑ Zaratiegui 1996, p. 197
  43. ↑ as demonstrated by the sympathy for the Fueristas in the 1880s, see Zaratiegui 1996, p. 181
  44. ↑ the two contending factions were moderate cuarentaiunistas and radical antitrentainuevistas, see Jesus Maria Fuente Langas, Los tradicionalistas navarros bajo la dictadura de Primo de Rivera (1923–1930), [in:] Príncipe de Viana 55 (1994), p. 419
  45. ↑ Enrique Gil Robles declared in 1891: “la política de un diputado sinceramente católico no debe ser otra que la de Jesucristo Rey”, quoted after Zaratiegui 1996, p. 180
  46. ↑ Remirez 1988, p. 365
  47. ↑ Remirez 1988, p. 366
  48. ↑ Remirez 1988, pp. 366-367
  49. ↑ Remirez 1988, p. 366
  50. ↑ Fuente 1990, p. 954
  51. ↑ Letter from Don Jaime to De Villores, ABC 13.03.1923
  52. ↑ Francisco Javier González de Castejón y Elío (1848-1919)
  53. ↑ some scholars claim that the Navarrese Carlism of late 19th century suffered two secessions: this of Integristas, but also of more pragmatic sectors of clase dirigente, which oriented themselves towards realignment with the regime and was symbolized by de Vadillo, see Remirez 1988, p. 361
  54. ↑ Zaratiegui 1996, p. 187, Remirez 1988, p. 373; for detailed profile, see Mercedes Vázquez de Prada Tiffe, El Marqués del Vadillo. Figura clave del partido conservador en Navarra, [in:] Estudios de historia moderna y contemporánea: homenaje a Federico Suarez Verdeguer, Madrid 1991, ISBN 8432127485, pp. 469-480
  55. ↑ Zaratiegui 1996, p. 181
  56. ↑ Partido Fuerista entry in Gran Enciclopedia Navarra; their daily Lauburu ceased to appear in 1886, see Zaratiegui 1996, p. 183
  57. ↑ the Integrists changed their view once El Tradicionalista leaked an alleged instruction of Don Carlos suggesting alignment with Liberals instead of the secessionists, Zaratiegui 1996, p. 197
  58. ↑ Romualdo Cesáreo Sanz y Escartin (Pamplona), Simón Montoya Ortigosa (Estella), Miguel Irigaray Gorría (Tafalla) and Eduardo del Castillo Piñeyro (Tudela). The Integrist candidate was Juan Manuel Ortí y Lara (Pamplona), Zaratiegui 1996, p. 195-197
  59. ↑ the Integrists instructed their followers that “antes que carlista, cualquier cosa: republicano, fusionista, conservador, cualquier cosa antes que carlista, Zaratiegui 1996, p. 181; similar instructions were issued by Carlos VII against the treacherous Nocedalistas, Zaratiegui 1996, p. 197
  60. ↑ Remirez 1988, pp. 367, 370
  61. ↑ Remirez 1988, p. 368
  62. ↑ Remirez 1988, p. 384
  63. ↑ the alliance was reinforced by joint opposition to the so-called Ley del Candado, see Juan Ramón de Andrés Martín, El caso Feliú y el dominio de Mella en el partido carlista en el período 1909–1912, [in:] Historia contemporánea 10 (1997), p. 100
  64. ↑ Cerro 1988, pp. 93-94
  65. ↑ in electoral district of Pamplona there were 3 mandates available, though a voter was entitled to only 2 votes. The Carlist supporters were casting their first ballot for a Carlist and a second – if they wished so – for a candidate recommended by the Carlists, compare Zaratiegui 1996, p. 187, Remirez 1988, p. 373
  66. ↑ in local Pamplonese elections in November 1915 the Jaimistas stood alone and were trashed by a broad Leftist coalition of romanonistas, socialists, democrats, republicans and datistas; during supplementary elections to the Cortez in the Pamplona district of December 1915 the Jaimistas agreed that a maurista and a liberal datista candidates would withdraw, and in return during partial elections to Diputación Foral in Estella in February 1916 they supported a Liberal candidate, which has resulted in expulsion of an enraged dissenting Carlist, Francisco Errea, Fuente 1990, p. 950
  67. ↑ Fuente 1990, pp. 950-951
  68. ↑ which triggered also internal conflict within Traditionalism , Imizcoz, Garde 1988, pp. 148-149
  69. ↑ known as Alianza Foral. See also cuarentaiunistas and antitrentainuevistas, Fuente 1994, p. 419
  70. ↑ which helped to ensure a mandate from Pamplona for the Nationalist Manuel Irujo from 1918 onwards. The Carlo-nationalist alliance caused bewilderement also among the Conservatives and the Liberals, see Imizcoz, Garde 1988, p. 150
  71. ↑ Imizcoz, Garde 1988, p. 150
  72. ↑ de Mella, since 1914 at odds with the claimant, in 1918 abandoned the orthodox Carlist Estella and preferred to run (successfully) from his native Asturias, see Carolyn P. Boyd, Covadonga y el regionalismo asturiano, [in:] Ayer 64 (2006), p. 167
  73. ↑ Artajona registered one of the highest, if not the highest, rate of volunteers to the Carlist Requeté militia during the Spanish Civil War; 400 males volunteered out of a 2,500 community, see Javier Ugarte Tellería, La nueva Covadonga insurgente: orígenes sociales y culturales de la sublevación de 1936 en Navarra y el País Vasco, Madrid 1998, ISBN 847030531X, 9788470305313, p. 108; somewhat different numbers (probably referring to the entire municipio) are given in Oscar Elía Mañú, Memoria del Requeté, [in:] Libertad Digital 15.07.10, available here
  74. ↑ with the initial exception of Cirauqui. The town, most consistently voting Carlists even in the early 1980s - see Jeremy MacClancy, The Decline of Carlism, Reno 2000, ISBN 9780874173444, p. 218 - in the early 1890s was dominated by a local Liberal cacique family of Lacalle, Zaratiegui 1996, p. 201
  75. ↑ for 1890 see Zaratiegui 1996, pp. 220-222, for 1910 see the map in Remirez 1988, pp. 369, 374
  76. ↑ though Viana tended to favour Carlism until the early 20th century, see Remirez 1988, p. 376, Imizcoz, Garde 1988, p. 153
  77. ↑ see Serrano 1989, tables pp. 760-763, maps pp. 771-772
  78. ↑ in 1891 mainstream Carlists trashed the Conservatives 3,2:1, Zaratiegui 1996, pp. 202-206
  79. ↑ in 1898 mainstream Carlists led over the Conservatives 1,6:1, Remirez 1988, pp. 373-375
  80. ↑ details Serrano 1989, p. 766
  81. ↑ at a 1:3,7 rate in 1891, Zaratiegui 1996, p. 219
  82. ↑ Serrano 1989, p. 761; for geographical analysis of Carlis strength in Navarre in the 1930s - including excellent maps - see Juan Jesús Virto Ibáñez, La Navarra que fue a la guerra, [in:] Historia 16 (1989), pp. 12-20
  83. ↑ gaining some 10-15% of the votes. In the urbanised municipality of Baztan they recorded a disastrous result, defeated at a rate of 1:5,6, Zaratiegui 1996, p. 220-221
  84. ↑ his influence persisted until the early 1920s, see Fuente 1990, pp. 955-956
  85. ↑ mostly around Lumbier; in 1910 in the Aoiz area the Carlists remained in minority, see Cerro 1988, pp. 102-103
  86. ↑ Irigaray won in Aoiz district, covering the Eastern Pyrenees, no sooner that in 1901; for 1910 see Cerro 1988, pp. 102-103, for 1916 see Fuente 1990, p. 956
  87. ↑ in Valle de Roncal the Carlists were gaining only some 15% of the votes around 1910, see Cerro 1988, pp. 102-103, in 1916 Rodezno won at a marginal rate 1,1:1, Fuente 1990, p. 956
  88. ↑ Remirez 1988, pp. 369, 374
  89. ↑ Fuente 1990, p. 955
  90. ↑ also Valles Meridionales, minor fractions of Valdizarbe, Pirineo Central and the city of Pamplona, Fuente 1994, p. 418. For detailed analysis of Integrist strength in the neighbouring Provincias Exentas see Javier Real Cuesta, El Carlismo Vasco 1876-1900, Madrid 1985, ISBN 8432305103, pp. 113-127
  91. ↑ compare Serrano 1989, maps pp. 771-772, tables pp. 758-760
  92. ↑ for 1891 see Zaratiegui 1996, p. 219, for 1898 see Remirez 1988, p. 376, for 1931 see Serrano Moreno 1989, pp. 760-763
  93. ↑ Cerro 1988, pp. 105, later the area tended to split; the North voting Carlist and the South against them, see Fuente 1990, p. 956, for 1930s see Serrano 1989, pp. 767-770 tables and maps 771-772
  94. ↑ in 1890s Carlism was in minority, see Zaratiegui 1996, p. 223, in 1910 most area opted decisively for Carlism, see Cerro 1988, p. 104
  95. ↑ defeating the Conservatives 2,1:1 in 1891, winning also in 1898 and 1910, Cerro 1988, p. 104
  96. ↑ in 1910 the Carlists still managed to win in Tudela, though it was by an extremely small margin; the ensuing dispute was finally settled by Tribunal Supremo, Cerro 1988, p. 99
  97. ↑ In 1916 the Carlist candidate Kleiser won in the usually hostile cities of Corella, Fitero and Cintruénigo, but failed to retake Tudela, see Fuente 1990, p. 956
  98. ↑ the Right briefly retook the city of Tudela in 1933, see Garcia 1989, pp. 255-7
  99. ↑ like Simón Montoya Ortigosa in 1891, Luis Martinez Kleiser in 1916, Esteban Martinez Vélez in 1923 or the Integrists Juan Manuel Ortí y Lara in 1891, Canuto Mina y Guelbenzu in 1893, Mariano Bayona Arteta in 1893
  100. ↑ see Indice Historico de Diputados available here
  101. ↑ see Indice Historico de Diputados available here
  102. ↑ see Lloréns y Fernandez de Córdoba, Joaquin entry at Gran Enciclopedia Navarra, available here, and Joaquín Lloréns Fernández de Cordoba entry at Auñamendi Eusko Entziklopedia, available here
  103. ↑ in 1916 his initially declared opponent, Félix Andoño, withdrew before the balotting, see Fuente 1990, p. 953
  104. ↑ Juan Ramón de Andrés Martín, El cisma mellista. Historia de una ambición política, Madrid 2000, ISBN 9788487863820, p. 175
  105. ↑ de Mella’s 9th term in 1916 was from his native Asturias
  106. ↑ probably he would have easily won also the 1899 elections, but preferred to obey the orders of Carlos VII and abstained
  107. ↑ Romualdo Cesáreo Sanz Escartin entry at Auñamendi Eusko Entziklopedia, see here
  108. ↑ he ran as independent, though was recommended by both the Jaimistas and the Integristas, see Justo Garran Mosso entry at Auñamendi Eusko Entziklopedia
  109. ↑ when elected in 1907 he was not the national Carlist leader yet
  110. ↑ Larrasoaña entry at Auñamendi Eusko Entziklopedia; Carlist leaders were also running in Navarre in the 1930s (successfully) and in the 1970s (unsuccessfully)
  111. ↑ Zaratiegui 1996, p. 196
  112. ↑ Fuente 1990, p. 946
  113. ↑ though by only 43% of those entitled to vote
  114. ↑ Historiographical review in Manuel Ledesma Pérez, Una lealtad de otros siglos (en torno a las interpretaciones del carlismo) [in:] Historia social 24 (1996), pp. 139-149. In non-Spanish literature studies focusing on economic determinants of Carlism started to appear in the 1960s, see Gerald Brennan, The Spanish Labyrinth, Cambridge 1962. In Spain they became popular after the fall of Francoism, for the most mature sample see Josep María Sole i Sabate (ed.), El carlismo i la seva base social, Barcelona 1992, for an early sample see José María Donézar, La desamortización de Mendizabal en Navarra, 1836-1851, Madrid 1975, for later sample see Francisco Javier Asín Remírez de Esparza, Alfonso Bullón de Mendoza, Carlismo y sociedad 1833-1840, Zaragoza 1987
  115. ↑ some note that Carlism flourished in areas with low level of social tension, as in Navarre it was "above all a movement of the economically satisfied", see Martin Blinkhorn, Carlism and Crisis in Spain, 1931-1939, Cambridge 2008, ISBN 978-0-521-20729-4, ISBN 9780521086349, p. 17. For a short review of opposite views, presenting Carlism as movement of social protest ("fue una gran protesta social y una auténtica lucha de clases"), see e.g. José Carlos Clemente, "El carlismo en el novecientos español (1876-1936)", Madrid 1999, ISBN 8483741539, 9788483741535, p. 47
  116. ↑ the issue of commons underlined in Steven Henry Martin, The Commonality of Enemies: Carlism and anarchism in modern Spain, 1868-1937 [MA thesis], Peterborough 2014, pp. 26-47, MacClancy 2000, p. 38, Renato Barahona, Vizcaya on the Eve of Carlism: Politics and Society, 1800-1833, Reno 1989, ISBN 0874171229, 9780874171228, p. 170
  117. ↑ see María Cruz Rubio Liniers, María Talavera Díaz, Bibliografías de Historia de España, vol. XII: El carlismo, Madrid 2012, ISBN 8400090136, 9788400090135, chapters Sociologia del carlismo. Bases sociales, pp. 100-112, especially sub-chapter Sociedad agraria. Campesinado. Clases populares, pp. 108-110
  118. ↑ compare a popular vision held by Carlist enemies, who considered them backwater rednecks. Probably the most famous manifestation of such a vision is a phrase attributed to the socialist leader Indalecio Prieto: “Carlist is a red-topped animal which lives in the mountains, eats communion, and attacks people”, see e.g. María Eugenia Salaverri, Lecciones de historia, [in:] El Pais 22.08.2014
  119. ↑ where construction of the busy railway line rapidly transformed adjacent municipalities
  120. ↑ José Andrés-Gallego, Génesis de la Navarra contemporanea, [in:] Principe de Viana 6 (1987), pp. 195-234, Anton Pazos, El clero Navarro (1900-1936). Origen social, procedencia geografica y formación sacerdotal, Pamplona 1990, ISBN 8431310979, 9788431310974
  121. ↑ though in case of the city of Pamplona it is difficult to find a clear dependence between the Carlist vote and the social structure of the electorate. For late 19th century it seems that Carlism fared worst in districts where the lowest fraction of artesanos and obreros was combined with the highest fraction of empleados and profesiones liberales (sección IV: Plaza de la Constitución, and sección V, la Ciudadela), though the correlation can not be reversed, Zaratiegui 1996, pp. 204-205. The 20th century patterns are more clear, see Serrano 1989. See also interesting statistical comparison of Vitoria and Pamplona in Ugarte 1998, pp. 216-217
  122. ↑ Francisco Javier Caspistegui Gorasurreta, “Esa ciudad maldita, cuna del centralismo, la burocracia y el liberalismo”: la ciudad como enemigo en el tradicionalismo español, [in:] Actas del congreso internacional "Arquitectura, ciudad e ideología antiurbana", Pamplona 2002, ISBN 8489713510; however, one should be careful not to apply this anti-urbanism universally; in some regions, like Galicia, Carlism turned out to be a chiefly urban phenomenon, see Jose Ramon Barreiro Fernandez, El Carlismo Gallego, Santiago de Compostela 1976, ISBN 8485170105, pp. 264-266
  123. ↑ Serrano 1989, p. 735
  124. ↑ complete list in Cruz Rubio, Talavera Díaz 2012, chapter Fueros y nacionalismo vasco, pp. 194-207, for samples see Beltza (Emiliano López de Adán), Del Carlismo al nacionalismo burgués, San Sebastian 1978, Javier Corcuera Atienza, Orígines, ideologia y organización del nacionalismo vasco, Madrid 1979, Vicente Garmendia, La ideologia Carlista (1868-1876), San Sebastian 1984, Angel Garcia Sanz-Marcotegui, Navarra. Conflictividad social a comienzos del siglo XX y noticia del anarcosindicalista Gregorio Suberviola Baigorri (1896-1924), Pamplona 1984, MacClancy 2000. For the latest work see Angel García-Sanz, Iñaki Iriartem Fernando Mikelarena, Historia del navarrismo (1841-1936). Sus relaciones con el vasquismo, Pamplona 2002, ISBN 8495075903
  125. ↑ eventually leading to military confrontation during the Civil War; it is worth noting, though, that the Navarrese section of PNV, Napar Buru Batzar, opted for joining the Carlist insurgency in 1936
  126. ↑ or alleged characteristics, like intransigence, confrontational political style and penchant for violence, see for instance Robert P. Clark, The Basques, the Franco Years and Beyond, Reno 1979, ISBN 0874170575, 9780874170573, pp. 107-189, Diego Muro, Ethnicity and Violence: The Case of Radical Basque Nationalism, Routledge, 2013, ISBN 1134167695, 9781134167692, pp. 39-115
  127. ↑ a popular slogan making rounds in Navarre in the 1970s was “hijo de carlista batasunero es”, the Carlist’s child is a batasunero (activist of Herri Batasuna, a Basque nationalist party), see MacClancy 2000, p. 237
  128. ↑ Manuel Martorell-Pérez, Nuevas aportaciones históricas sobre la evolución ideológica del carlismo, [in:] Gerónimo de Uztariz 16 (2000) , pp. 95-108
  129. ↑ Eduardo González Calleja, Historiografía reciente sobre el carlismo.¿El carlismo de la argumentación política?, [in:] Ayer 38 (2000), pp. 275-288

Further reading

External links

Appendix. Navarrese deputies 1879-1923

This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 8/14/2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.