Poster design courtesy of Jeanet Alessandra Tapia Huertas for KCL Latin American Society
Professor Francisco Bethencourt is a leading historian of the lusophone world, fellow of the Academia Europaea, and Charles Boxer Professor at King’s College London University.
Dr Bethencourt was interviewed on the 24th of June by our Cultural and Outreach Officer, Emily Arama Sánchez, as part of a Decolonising History Project organised by the King’s College London History Department. This project was coordinated by Professor Laura Gowing and Decolonise KCL Society President, Lauren Fernandes.
Dr Bethencourt’s interview analyses the complex nature of decolonisation in Latin America; examining how it continues to affect current politics and how we approach historical teaching.
This is Part One of a three-part collaborative series. Our Parts Two and Three interview with Professor Richard Drayton is coming soon to El Cortao’.
Thank you for providing this interview Dr Bethencourt. How would you describe decolonisation?
Decolonisation was a political process defined by the dismantlement of the European empires and the assertion of new, independent countries in the Americas, Africa, and Asia. This process created a new international political system after World War II. The independence of the former European colonies in the Americas from the 1770s to the 1820s created a first stage of decolonisation, even though it was led by white colonisers. The expansion of newly independent countries, such as the United States, or colonisation by non-Western countries, such as Japan, during the first decades of the twentieth century up to WWII, complicated the picture. Before, during and after the process of political emancipation from the 1940s to the 1970s, colonialism was shown to have a long-term impact on economic, political and cultural dependence. The work of William Du Bois, José Carlos Mariatégui, Aimé Césaire, Frantz Fanon, among many others, theorised dependence at all levels, including absorption of the colonizers' values and hierarchies. Recent development of indigenous rights has confronted prevalent structures inherited from the colonial times.
In your opinion, has the current curriculum been politicised towards a Eurocentric perspective?
The curriculum of History in the main universities of the Western world is still dominated by national narratives. Globalisation is entangled with the emergence of capitalism, presented as driven by European expansion, responsible for the diffusion of science and technology. Political thought, cultural and literary studies are still limited, in many cases, to European history. There is very little space for serious analysis of other civilizations and cultures, generally relegated to anthropology, regional studies or small sections of general historical surveys. I am talking about the mainstream, although there were always attempts, mainly from the 1920s onwards, to create courses on different civilizations; namely on Islam, on Hinduism, China and Japan. There is certainly a strong knowledge accumulated on and in different parts of the world that is now better reflected in Western universities. However, we still have a long way to go. The construction of the curriculum in different universities needs to be studied from a historical point of view. It has always been driven by political needs - consciously or unconsciously.
“There is very little space for serious analysis of other civilizations and cultures, generally relegated to anthropology, regional studies or small sections of general historical surveys.”
Does this Eurocentric perspective start at King’s or is this established in preliminary education that leads to several students’ expertise being based on colonised teaching?
This question leads to the relation between different levels of education, from primary school to the university. Primary and secondary schools have a long-term impact on the vast majority of the population. The universities may create a more open and inclusive curriculum, but the impact on other levels of education is not guaranteed.
As a historian of Latin America, I am sure you are well aware of how modern depictions of Latinx people, whether it be in books, film, art or music, have been based on the white experience. How does this manifest itself in modern historiography of Latin America?
The designation Latin America has traces of international political conflict in Europe. It was invented in nineteenth century France to claim a stake in that region of the world. The Spaniards still call the region Iberoamerica to mark their precedent as "discoverers". Both designations do not reflect the importance of indigenous people. The depiction of Latin American peoples in Western popular culture is problematic: see the cartoon characters Zé Carioca (created by a Brazilian, it is true), Pancho Pistoles or Speedy Gonzalez, defined by laziness, restlessness, and/or maliciousness. They were developed by different film companies in the 1940s and 1950s. However, Latin America always knew to fight back - see the influence of Diego Rivera on US public art in the 1930s. The historiography of Latin America is now very powerful, emancipated from the Eurocentric vision of the past that dominated up to the 1960s. In Brazil, for example, there is a powerful historiography, among many important historians I mention here Luiz Felipe de Alencastro and João José Reis, leading world scholars of slave trade and slavery, while the new generation is producing excellent work abroad, I remember here Roquinaldo Ferreira, Ana Lucia Araujo or Mariana Candido studying the memories of slavery and women in Africa.
“The Spaniards still call the region Iberoamerica to mark their precedent as ‘discoverers’.”
Based on your experience, what is most striking to you about notions of decolonisation in Latin America?
When I was at the Gulbenkian Cultural Centre in Paris, I organised a symposium on Atlantic History with researchers from different countries who were interested in the three continents and the historical relations between them. I remember Michel Cahen, a specialist in Africa, who at a certain point turned to our Brazilian colleagues and said: "there is a misunderstanding here; in Brazil you have a continuity from colonial times." It triggered a major discussion, because there had not been a disruption of elites from colonial times to post-independence. The royal family had escaped from the French invasion to Brazil and then managed two monarchies in Europe and the New World. The establishment of the Republic in 1889 did not radically change the composition of the social elites. Decolonisation is still on the table, due to this continuity of elites of European origin. In Brazil, it would have been unthinkable for the country to have had a President of indigenous origin, such as Benito Juárez in Mexico (1858-72).
Across several Latin American countries, we see that some particular legacies of colonialism are colourism, exaggerated gender archetypes, and the demonisation of black religions. Why do you think this is, how do you think this has developed and what do you see as the right steps to decolonise these issues?
There are many different social and ethnic profiles in Latin America. Recently, the President of Argentina, Alberto Fernández, provoked an uproar when he declared that "the Mexicans came from the Indians, the Brazilians from the jungle, but we Argentines came from the ships. And they were ships that came from Europe." More Eurocentric than this is difficult to imagine. But beyond national stereotypes we have regional and local prejudices about class, race, and gender. However, demonisation of black religions varies from place to place, and Brazil does not have the worst record in that regard. By contrast, racism could co-exist with praise of mixed-race people, while gender stereotypes have been difficult to displace. How the past is mobilised to reproduce hierarchies and obtain monopolisation of resources is for me a major issue of historical enquiry.
To what extent is the current political dysphoria in many Latin American countries a product of colonisation? Would a greater understanding of colonisation yield different results?
Colonialism left a significant mark on racial prejudices related to people of indigenous and African origin. In several countries there is clearly a reproduction of old elites, although many new economic activities emerged and renewed those elites. Not all is a direct result of colonialism after two centuries of independence. Recent research on social inequality in Latin America, namely by Leandro Prados de la Escosura, shows the importance of the nineteenth century as a turning point for increased inequality. It is true that economic growth brings with it bigger margins for extraction. In any case, several Latin American countries, mainly Brazil, have been at the top of global inequality rankings.
“How the past is mobilised to reproduce hierarchies and obtain monopolisation of resources is for me a major issue of historical enquiry.”
What do you see your role as a historian of Latin America to be?
I included Latin America in my work on global history, mainly on racisms, but also on my long-term project on the history of inequality. I studied the history of Brazil, which played a crucial role in the Portuguese empire, but other Latin American countries, mainly Mexico and Peru, have also been touched by my research; first on the Inquisition, now on the ‘New Christians of Jewish Origin’ - a new book I am about to complete. My next project is a concise book concerning human rights; I will include indigenous movements in Latin America that project new ideas about community rights.
Has the notion of decolonisation affected how we teach and learn history?
Decolonisation was not over with the independence of the former colonies. Recently, the debate on economic and cultural decolonisation has been extended to Western museums, in which the constitution of universal collections is seen as problematic. The practice of looting in colonial times is now well researched, showing the involvement of many institutions. Restitution of objects is on the table, since many cultures in the world were dispossessed. They need those objects to trace their origins and their identity. The debate has also been extended to the universities, not only because several of them benefited from colonial exploitation, but because they created the institutional framework of knowledge that contributed to define legal relations of dependence. The debate is also enlarged to the curriculum, since traditional production of knowledge for political purposes is a ballast that we need to critically analyse.
“Decolonisation was not over with the independence of the former colonies.”
If teachers see elements of Eurocentrism in a student’s work and interpretations of history, how do you think they ought to approach it?
We cannot censor students' work; we just need to create a critical framework of analysis that stimulates lateral and innovative thinking. We certainly need to encourage standards of consistency in formulating questions and defining arguments that should help to overcome prejudices. I have been confronted with those issues in the past and I always stimulate the students to reflect on different arguments and question traditional ways of thinking. There are no predefined answers in Humanities; they need to find their own path.
Sometimes decolonised teaching has been seen to vary based on the different places and periods that have been focused on. For example, in my first year, decolonised teaching was more evident in the ‘Worlds of British Empire’ module than the ‘Politics and Society in Britain’ module. How do you think we could rectify this?
We need to open the academic staff to minorities. There is some work done in that direction, but we need to do more. The students are very important in academia, they bring with them new ideas and new demands resulting from their own social experiences. This helps to formulate new historical questions. The problems of the present always inspire new research into the past. Then we also need to discuss bibliography: crucial authors included or excluded, racial and gender preferences. Again, some work has been done in this direction in the past years at King's. It enlarges diversity and includes new historical approaches.
“The problems of the present always inspire new research into the past.”
As is clear, the legacy of colonisation is best seen in the modern day in the system of knowledge production and dissemination whereby colonial nations were able to dominate and essentially rewrite the historical narrative based on notions of white saviourism. Do you think, that the education system we have today, wherein ancestors of those colonised have less access to information about their predecessors because of current socio-economic inequalities than ancestors of those who colonised, is a legacy of colonialism?
If I understood the question and its premises, I agree that the legacy of colonialism still permeates the way of thinking both in the former empires and in the newly independent countries. It is true that deconstruction of the colonial past has made significant progress, the framework of knowledge is now less imbalanced, but there is still a long way to go. Investment at different levels of education in different parts of the world will be crucial.
Instead of education being based on a system of meritocracy, we see a price tag attached to it. Where you live, what schools you can go to, and what resources you have, all tie into your experience of education. Articles, for example, that academics such as yourself have published, are not accessible to a wide range of students who want to learn about their own history because of how much they cost. So how do you think that we can go about making access to such histories equal?
In the past decades the education system stopped promoting social mobility in several countries. In spite of some efforts to support students from poor background, the best universities in the UK and the US have not reversed the reproduction of social elites. By contrast, the access to journals and books online has improved. Maughan Library is providing a much better digital service than five years ago.
Moreover, it seems that decolonisation has been seen as a term that is relatively optional. But if colonialism did effectively reshape the world we all live in, do you think that colonial history should be compulsory in teaching?
We need to avoid a top-down vision of history. Colonial structures certainly contributed to shape the world, but we cannot forget local agency and local knowledge. There was always resistance to colonial domination, even to slave trade and slavery, that we must integrate in our research and teaching.
Why does the current curriculum make modules regarding Europe mandatory and global modules optional?
The curriculum of History at King's is being entirely restructured. We have created new modules in medieval, early modern and modern world history for Year One that will be taught from 2022 onwards. The second and third years are under revision. You will have a more diversified choice and at the same time a more compact curriculum.
“We need to avoid a top-down vision of history. Colonial structures certainly contributed to shape the world, but we cannot forget local agency and local knowledge.”
Your recent works have been incredibly interesting and comprehensive, especially the dialogue you establish between Portugal and Africa, as you create integrations of history. How do you think establishing such links helps us to truly decolonise history?
Colonial history has its limits; you need not only to acknowledge local agency, but also alternative ways of thinking and doing. In postcolonial times, these alternatives can be very powerful - as the history of Latin America reminds us every day. I am very interested now in indigenous rights and their historical background. Different traditions of thought and political action need to be integrated into our research.
Additionally, you note how cosmopolitanism is always evolving and that the world has become economically interconnected. But while I can agree that notions of cosmopolitanism are always changing, I would question the extent to which the world is economically interconnected because this manner of phrasing implies a consensual connection, whereas the reality for many is forced exploitative means of ‘connection’ to Western economic models. Do you think such an economic ‘connection’ is simply a restructured form of colonial manipulation or is it something else entirely?
Cosmopolitanism is not a Western invention: hospitality, travelling for trade or for curiosity, the feeling of being a citizen of the world, the idea that one can be at home in various cultures, sharing multiple identities, can be found in different civilizations. There are traditions of African and Asian cosmopolitanism. Likewise, human rights have been criticised as an invention of the West to subordinate other cultures. This was the vision of Immanuel Wallerstein, who curiously wrote a very interesting but Eurocentric history of the modern world system. However, human rights were appropriated by slaves to obtain emancipation, by colonised peoples to challenge colonialism, by post-independence countries to expose political and economic forms of dependence forged by former imperial powers. Human rights have been evolving from political rights, based on the protection of the individual before the state, to economic and social rights. Environmental and community rights reinforce the collective dimension of human rights, creating a basis for changes in the system in which we live. Economic connections between continents have certainly been shaped by empires and, in the past hundred years, by multinational companies, but the big debate nowadays is about how to obtain a democratic control of the process of globalisation.
In your virtual exhibition and documentary, ‘Racism and Citizenship’, you mentioned how you tried to raise questions of civilisation. In your opinion, were feelings of ‘belonging’ inclusive?
The role of museums and public galleries became very important in the production of new knowledge. We live in a visual culture; images should be used more and more to question daily assumptions and colonial heritage. In my historical research, I regularly use images, because sometimes they express ideas better than texts. Some of the best exhibitions I have seen in my life gave me new ideas of research. I hope that my exhibition of racism and citizenship made people think about inequality and discrimination. In Portugal, it contributed to launching a new debate around racism and stimulated an intervention on the way secondary schools should deal with the problem. Social psychology has been analysing feelings of belonging for a long time, it is part of the debate on identities, since "liquid modernity", as Zygmunt Bauman suggested, is defined by multiple and unstable identities.
“We live in a visual culture; images should be used more and more to question daily assumptions and colonial heritage.”
Finally, what do you see as the future for decolonising the curriculum?
Decolonising the curriculum implies the participation of all communities of students and professors in the definition of the future university - hopefully more diverse and more inclusive. We need to discuss new areas of investment, open up for cross-fertilization of research between disciplines, reflect on choices of modules and bibliographies. The presence of minorities is important, both among students and academic staff. For me it is more a work of construction than deconstruction; good choices will naturally discard inadequate ways of doing and thinking.
Selected publications: Dr Bethencourt is the author of Racisms: From the Crusades to the Twentieth Century (Princeton, 2013, translated in Portugal, Italy and Brazil) and The Inquisition: a Global History, 1478-1834 (Cambridge, 2009, previously published in France, Portugal, and Spain). He edited or co-edited Gendering the Portuguese-Speaking World (Leiden, 2021); Inequality in the Portuguese-Speaking World (Brighton, 2018); Cosmopolitanism in the Portuguese-speaking World (Leiden, 2017); Utopia in Portugal, Brazil and Lusophone African Countries (Oxford, 2015) Frontières religieuses à l'époque moderne (Paris, 2013), Racism and Ethnic Relations in the Portuguese-Speaking World (Oxford, 2012), The Portuguese Oceanic Expansion, 1400-1800 (Cambridge, 2007), L’empire portugais face aux autres empires (Paris, 2007), História da Expansão Portuguesa, 5 vols. (Lisbon, 1998-1999).
Exhibition: He organised an exhibition on Racism and Citizenship at the Padrão dos Descobrimentos, Lisbon, (May-September 2017, www.racisms.org).
Fellowship: He was awarded a Major Leverhulme Fellowship to work on New Christians: the Rise and Fall of a Trading Elite, 1497-1773 (2017-2019).
Supervision: He supervised or co-supervised seventeen PhD dissertations in the UK, Portugal and Brazil, and co-examined nineteen PhD theses in the UK, France and Portugal. Bethencourt is in the advisory boards of European PhD programmes, research projects, research centres and journals in France, Portugal, Spain and Brazil.
Work in Progress: The new monograph on New Christian Trading Elite, Fifteenth-Eighteenth Century was submitted this summer to Princeton University Press. In the meantime, the book Dr Bethencourt is editing with Catia Antunes on Merchants Culture will be published by the end of this year at Brill.
