This is a peculiar book that nevertheless contains nuggets of useful information and raises some interesting issues that those studying the independence period could profit from considering. Its peculiarity begins with its cover, a rather inappropriate and irrelevant picture of three naked young women, taken from J. G. Stedman's Narrative, of a Five Years’ Expedition, against the Revolted Negroes of Surinam. The title mentions three racial groups, but mestizos are discussed only in passing in the chapters, probably because they are less easy to identify in the historical record than the other two. The title also indicates a focus on the independence period, but some authors take their story back to the conquest and some push it forward well into the nineteenth century. The book is divided into sections on Colombia, Ecuador, Venezuela, Bolivia and Peru; the sections are not geographically specific, however, as the other countries of South America get an occasional mention, and one chapter includes a long discussion of runaways in Brazil. A number of contributors begin by regretting the lack of published material on these subaltern groups in the independence struggles, but their discussions and the bibliographies supplied for each chapter indicate that we know quite a bit. Indeed, more studies have appeared since the publication of this book, notably the works of Roger Pita Pico and Marcela Echeverri on Colombia and Alex Borucki on Uruguay. Nevertheless, there is still much to be done on the subject, as many of the authors state.

Space prevents a detailed discussion of each of the 14 chapters and the conclusion by Georges Lomné, so let me touch instead on some of the general themes and points that the contributors have presented. The basic conclusion is that these groups played a significant role in the independence struggles, much greater than is suggested by earlier histories that tended to concentrate on the independence heroes and the political developments of the period. At the same time, how and why these groups responded was in no way predictable. In some cases they got involved because of the changes associated with the late colonial Bourbon reforms, thereby adding to the debate about the causes of independence. In others, it was the Napoleonic invasion of Spain in 1808, the forced abdication of Ferdinand VII and the resulting crises and uncertainties that drew in or triggered the various actions. Often the subaltern groups were responding to local concerns and not the wider issues that more erudite leaders were promoting. The 1812 liberal Constitution and the patriot call for ‘freedom’ helped to further the uncertainty, confusion and conflict. Rarely were the three groups’ responses marked by racial unity. Leadership was almost always provided by members of the white elite, although on occasion a member of the subaltern group took a prominent role, yet within definite constraints. All of this meant that the groups were drawn in various directions, supporting the king or opposing him, linking with one patriot group against another and tying themselves to local leaders to protect local interests, which could mean confronting their own or another racial group. As a result, the social element of the independence struggles was undermined, and while independence was marked by significant social change, it did not accomplish a fundamental transformation. This, of course, worked to the advantage of the elites, who wanted to protect and advance their particular interests but were fearful of social revolution. They thus had to cope with the conundrum of turning to the non-white masses for military support without permitting them any real power or influence. This explains why some contributors to the book felt the need to push their analyses into the nineteenth century, to show that the struggles with a racial focus that began before and/or during the independence period continued for decades afterward.

Two chapters demonstrate these themes and developments particularly well. Both deal with quite specific regions and are based on archival material, in contrast to a few of the chapters whose research is limited to secondary sources. María Eugenia Chaves looks at slaves in the valley of Chota-Mira, north of Quito in Ecuador. She traces their unrest, which took the form of flight and banditry, back to the expulsion of the Jesuits, who had been prominent hacendados in the valley, and the difficulties that occurred under the succeeding Temporalidades and private owners. Thus, many slaves had already resisted in some form when the movement toward self-rule added to the disruptions in their lives. Their unrest was more self-centred than tied to either the royalist or patriot faction, leaving the impression of a ‘dangerous’ sector of the population that needed to be brought under control. Elina Lovera Reyes examines the well-known Venezuelan region of Coro, but focuses on an indigenous group, the Caquetíos, rather than the usual blacks and pardos. She begins with the conquest and the ties that were established at that time between the crown and the Caquetíos, which explain the latter's firm loyalty to the king and their alliance with royalist groups during the independence period, even when the futility of their fight became clear. Nevertheless, they were never formally incorporated into the royalist armies, indicating the reservations that existed about them, and Lovera Reyes emphasises that other indigenous groups were not as faithful or loyal to the king as the Caquetíos.

The chapters underline the complexities of the independence struggles and the need to produce more of these micro-studies. They help to explain the length of the wars as well as the initial failures of the patriot cause. For several years the situation was chaotic, to say the least, so winning the support of large sections of the population was a vital but almost impossible task. Bringing these racially diverse groups on side created a wealth of new problems that leaders, regardless of their political orientation, had to contend with, and their decisions often proved more divisive than unifying. At the same time, the participation of these groups suggests that they should have won significant benefits for themselves. Their failure to do so points both to the effectiveness of the elites in limiting change and to the internal divisions and lack of common goals that is a prominent theme of this collection.