Navarrese electoral Carlism during the Restoration

Edit links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Navarre

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

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:

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.

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

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 replaced 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

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

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.

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.

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.

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
Ramón Nocedal

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%).[73]

Carlism enjoyed most support in the central zone of Navarre, covering the belt of

Baja Montaña and partially Prepireneo, with the core formed by confluence of Pamplona, Estella and Tafalla districts, around Artajona,[74] Mendigorría, Larraga, Val de Mañeru[75] and Valdizarbe.[76] A major change within this central zone was gradual deterioration of Carlist vote at the southern edge of the belt, in Ribera Estellesa,[77] Northern municipalities of Ribera Arga and in Sierra de Ujué.[78]

loose grip: Pyrenees

The city of Pamplona was in the early 1890s dominated by the Carlists,

1931 Pamplona was one of few places in Navarre where the Carlist-Nationalist coalition lost to the Left.[81] The city of Estella witnessed the opposite pattern: initially Carlists suffered heavy defeats[82] and conquered the city only in the early 20th century, to keep winning also during the overall democratic triumph of 1931.[83]

The Northern belt of the province (

Pirineos) was consistently less enthusiastic about Traditionalism. Until the late 1890s the movement fared rather badly in the mountains;[84] in Pirineos Orientales, dominated by the Valle de Roncal based Gayarre caciques,[85] the Carlists did not even bother to field a candidate. Over time they gained strength in Valles Meridionales, partially in Prepirineos[86] and Pirineos Orientales,[87] though their grip was less than firm.[88] Corredor del Araquil, in the 1890s loyal to legitimist cause,[89] was later conquered by the democrats.[90] Valles Cantábricos remained the Integrist stronghold,[91] 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,[92]
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.[93] 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 reversed the pattern.[94] Municipalities along the Lower Ebro did not display clear preferences until the 1910s,[95] though in Ribera Baja Carlism for decades maintained its insular fortress in the capital Tudela,[96] losing the city after 1910[97] and failing to retake it.[98] From then onwards, the entire Ribera Oriental was irreversibly slipping into the hands of Carlist enemies – mostly Republicans, though also the Socialists.[99]

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.

Joaquín Lloréns Fernández[101] and Juan Vázquez de Mella,[102]
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.[103] 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;[104] however, he was defeated in Estella by an cerralbista candidate in 1919.[105] Juan Vázquez de Mella (1861-1928) was an Asturian and a leading Carlist theorist. Though he served 8 Navarrese terms in the Cortes,[106] 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[107] and later serving also in the Senate.[108] 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.[109] Two cases when the national Carlist leaders competed in Navarre were these of Bartolomé Feliu Pérez in 1910[110] and Luis Hernando de Larramendi in 1920,[111] though there were local Navarrese leaders standing, like Simón Montoya Ortigosa (unsuccessfully) in the 1890s,[112] or Gabino Martínez Lope García (successfully) in the 1910s.[113] 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.

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,[115] though scholars from this school might present contradictory conclusions.[116] 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.[117] 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.[118] 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[119] and undercutting Carlist popularity, like is supposed to be the case of Corredor del Araquil.[120]

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.[121] 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,[122] leading even to emergence of an anti-urban thread within Carlism.[123] 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.[124]

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.[125] The discussion is mostly about when the two started to part,[126] to what extent Basque nationalism owes some of its characteristics[127] to Carlism, and to what extent the decline of Carlism resulted from its electorate having been taken over by Basque parties.[128]

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.[129] Another historiographer asks whether the new wave of works marks a return to politics as a primary analysis key.[130] This approach is yet to contribute to understanding the patterns of Carlist electoral results in Navarre.

See also

Footnotes

  1. 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. ISBN 8437056721
    , 9788437056722
  6. ISBN 978-84-259-1152-1
  7. 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. ISSN 0032-8472
    , p. 382
  10. ISBN 8425911524
    , 9788425911521, p. 444,
  11. 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. 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. Juan Vazquez de Mella (Estella), Miguel Irigaray (Tafalla) and Eduardo Castillo Pineiro
    (Tudela)
  26. 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 1988, 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. ^ 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. ^ the pattern of most Carlist support coming from mid-Navarre was clearly visible already during the Third Carlist War. In so-called Zona Media the Carlist combatants formed 12,54% of the entire population; for the Northern third, named "Montana", the figure was 4,97%; in the Southern third, named "Ribera", the figure was 4,73%, Eduardo Martínez Lacabe, Aproximación prosopográfica a los soldados carlistas en la guerra de 1872-1876, [in:] Huarte de San Juan. Geografía e historia 9 (2002), p. 125
  74. 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
  75. ISBN 9780874173444
    , p. 218 - in the early 1890s was dominated by a local Liberal cacique family of Lacalle, Zaratiegui 1996, p. 201
  76. ^ for 1890 see Zaratiegui 1996, pp. 220-222, for 1910 see the map in Remirez 1988, pp. 369, 374
  77. ^ though Viana tended to favour Carlism until the early 20th century, see Remirez 1988, p. 376, Imizcoz, Garde 1988, p. 153
  78. ^ see Serrano 1989, tables pp. 760-763, maps pp. 771-772
  79. ^ in 1891 mainstream Carlists trashed the Conservatives 3,2:1, Zaratiegui 1996, pp. 202-206
  80. ^ in 1898 mainstream Carlists led over the Conservatives 1,6:1, Remirez 1988, pp. 373-375
  81. ^ details Serrano 1989, p. 766
  82. ^ at a 1:3,7 rate in 1891, Zaratiegui 1996, p. 219
  83. ^ 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
  84. ^ 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
  85. ^ his influence persisted until the early 1920s, see Fuente 1990, pp. 955-956
  86. ^ mostly around Lumbier; in 1910 in the Aoiz area the Carlists remained in minority, see Cerro 1988, pp. 102-103
  87. ^ 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
  88. ^ 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
  89. ^ Remirez 1988, pp. 369, 374
  90. ^ Fuente 1990, p. 955
  91. ISBN 8432305103
    , pp. 113-127
  92. ^ compare Serrano 1989, maps pp. 771-772, tables pp. 758-760
  93. ^ for 1891 see Zaratiegui 1996, p. 219, for 1898 see Remirez 1988, p. 376, for 1931 see Serrano Moreno 1989, pp. 760-763
  94. ^ 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
  95. ^ in 1890s Carlism was in minority, see Zaratiegui 1996, p. 223, in 1910 most area opted decisively for Carlism, see Cerro 1988, p. 104
  96. ^ defeating the Conservatives 2,1:1 in 1891, winning also in 1898 and 1910, Cerro 1988, p. 104; Carlist position in Tudela was very much the result of activities and position of Blas Morte Sodornil, the local entrepreneur
  97. ^ in 1910 the Carlists still won in Tudela, though it was by an extremely small margin; the ensuing dispute was finally settled by Tribunal Supremo, Cerro 1988, p. 99
  98. ^ 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
  99. ^ the Right briefly retook the city of Tudela in 1933, see Garcia 1989, pp. 255-7
  100. ^ 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
  101. ^ see Indice Historico de Diputados available here
  102. ^ see Indice Historico de Diputados available here
  103. ^ see Lloréns y Fernandez de Córdoba, Joaquin entry at Gran Enciclopedia Navarra, available here Archived 2014-07-30 at the Wayback Machine, and Joaquín Lloréns Fernández de Cordoba entry at Auñamendi Eusko Entziklopedia, available here
  104. ^ in 1916 his initially declared opponent, Félix Andoño, withdrew before the balotting, see Fuente 1990, p. 953
  105. ISBN 9788487863820
    , p. 175
  106. ^ de Mella’s 9th term in 1916 was from his native Asturias
  107. ^ probably he would have easily won also the 1899 elections, but preferred to obey the orders of Carlos VII and abstained
  108. ^ Romualdo Cesáreo Sanz Escartin entry at Auñamendi Eusko Entziklopedia, see here
  109. ^ he ran as independent, though was recommended by both the Jaimistas and the Integristas, see Justo Garran Mosso entry at Auñamendi Eusko Entziklopedia
  110. ^ when elected in 1907 he was not the national Carlist leader yet
  111. ^ Larrasoaña entry at Auñamendi Eusko Entziklopedia; Carlist leaders were also running in Navarre in the 1930s (successfully) and in the 1970s (unsuccessfully)
  112. ^ Zaratiegui 1996, p. 196
  113. ^ Fuente 1990, p. 946
  114. ^ though by only 43% of those entitled to vote
  115. 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
  116. ISBN 8483741539
    , 9788483741535, p. 47
  117. ISBN 0874171229
    , 9780874171228, p. 170
  118. ISBN 8400090136
    , 9788400090135, chapters Sociologia del carlismo. Bases sociales, pp. 100-112, especially sub-chapter Sociedad agraria. Campesinado. Clases populares, pp. 108-110
  119. ^ 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
  120. ^ where construction of the busy railway line rapidly transformed adjacent municipalities
  121. ISBN 8431310979
    , 9788431310974
  122. ^ 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
  123. ISBN 8485170105
    , pp. 264-266
  124. ^ Serrano 1989, p. 735
  125. ISBN 8495075903
  126. ^ 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
  127. ISBN 1134167695
    , 9781134167692, pp. 39-115
  128. ^ 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
  129. ^ Manuel Martorell-Pérez, Nuevas aportaciones históricas sobre la evolución ideológica del carlismo, [in:] Gerónimo de Uztariz 16 (2000), pp. 95-108
  130. ^ 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

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Navarrese_electoral_Carlism_during_the_Restoration&oldid=1202520736"