Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T06:51:40.815Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Latin American Studies in British Universities: Progress and Prospects

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2022

Harold Blakemore
Harold Blakemore*
Affiliation:
Institute of Latin American Studies, The University of London
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Approximately five years have now elapsed since the establishment of Latin American studies in British universities on an institutional basis and, since the next quinquennium begins in less than two years' time, in 1972, and universities in Britain are already preparing their plans for that period, this may be an appropriate moment for taking stock of developments to date, and for speculating about the future. But in order to appreciate the current situation, it would be useful to set the subject in its historical context and to consider first the state of Latin American studies in Britain before the establishment of Centres and Institutes, and the reasons why they came into being.

Type
Reports
Information
Latin American Research Review , Volume 5 , Issue 3 , Fall 1970 , pp. 111 - 134
Copyright
Copyright © 1970 by the University of Texas Press

Footnotes

*

This review article is based in part on a previous account, entitled “Latin American Studies in Britain. After Parry: A Report of Some Reflections,” Bank of London and South America Review, 2:17 (May, 1968), 250-57, with considerable revision and up-dating of the material therein presented. The author wishes to emphasize that the views expressed are essentially personal and are in no way attributable to the institution of which he is a member.

References

NOTES

1. All British universities are independent, self-governing institutions, financed in large part by the state through the University Grants Committee which is appointed by the Treasury but is strongly representative of the Universities themselves. University developments and financial provision are planned on a quinquennial basis.

2. Report of the Committee on Latin American Studies (London, Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1965), iii. The Report is usually referred to as the Parry Report after the Chairman of the Committee, Dr. J. H. Parry, now Professor of Oceanic History at Harvard University, who needs no introduction to readers of this Review. The eponymous designation will be used hereafter.

3. See James Hunt, ‘Britain and Latin America,‘ in Claudio Veliz, ed., Latin America and the Caribbean: A Handbook (London, Anthony Blond, 1968), 441-447, for a convenient summary.

4. Expressed in literary terms, the writer knows of nothing in the British-Latin American connection comparable to E. M. Forster's A Passage to India or, for that matter, to N. C. Chaudhury's A Passage to England. Perhaps the closest approximations in Anglo-Latin American terms are, at least on the British side, the writings of W. H. Hudson and R. B. Cunninghame Graham, but they are neglected in England.

5. See Lewis Hanke, Contemporary Latin America: A Short History (Princeton, N. J., D. Van Nostrand Co., Inc., 1968), 6-8.

6. Parry Report, 6-7.

7. Ibid., 8.

8. Report of the Interdepartmental Commission on Oriental, Slavonic, East European and African Studies (the Scarbrough Report). (London, H.M.S.O., 1947), 8.

9. Report of the Sub-Committee (of the University Grants Committee) on Oriental, Slavonic, East European and African Studies (the Hayter Report), (London, H.M.S.O., 1961), passim.

10. The outstanding example is R. A. Humphreys, Professor of Latin American History in the University of London at University College since 1948. Not until 1961 was a second post in Latin American history created in the University, also at University College. Raised to a Readership in 1964, this post is held by Dr. John Lynch, like the author a former student of Professor Humphreys. A Lectureship in Latin American Geography was established in 1958, and an Assistant Lectureship in Latin American Economics in 1962, both, like the second history post, through the generous support of the Leverhulme Trust.

11. In the field of Asian studies, the School of Oriental Studies of London University had been founded in 1916, partly to train those entering the colonial service. It is not without interest that this step was taken when the raison d'être of the British Empire had begun to be questioned, and that the big expansion of Asian and African studies after the Scarbrough and Hayter Reports came when the Empire was being changed into the Commonwealth.

12. The Times, March 19, 1965.

13. The Committee ranged widely over a number of questions which are relevant to Latin American studies but which are not dealt with here. They included language teaching in schools and universities, and Latin American studies in institutions other than universities. The scope of this areicle is limited to university developments.

14. Parry Report, Summary of Finding and Recommendations, 1-3.

15. Parry Report, 23. The writer clearly remembers being told by a senior professor of a British university in the 1950s that Latin American studies would always be “purely peripheral in British higher education.” The professor subsequently took up an interest in the field, which was at its height soon after the establishment of the Parry Committee.

16. Parry Report, 28-29. In the event, funds were not forthcoming for posts but a travel fund was set up by the Grants Committee for Latin Americanists not holding Parry posts.

17. Parry Report, 68.

18. Ibid., 23.

19. Ibid., 25-26.

20. The taught higher degree has become more prominent in British universities in recent years partly in consequence of the recommendations of the basic document on the expansion of British higher education in the 1960s and 1970s: Higher Education: Report of the Committee Appointed by the Prime Minister under the Chairmanship of Lord Robbins, 1961-63. (The Robbins Report) (H.M.S.O., 1963). See particularly 100-103.

21. The controversy over ‘language as a tool’ cannot be discussed here because of its complexity and partisanship. Suffice to say that the London degree requires candidates without a formal language qualification to demonstrate, by examination if necessary, that they can understand what they are reading in Spanish or Portuguese. They are not required to do composition.

22. The writer must confess that this outcome, predicted by the Parry Report, has so far exceeded his own expectations. But the numbers of students are still comparatively small: the real test will come with greatly increased numbers wishing to use their newly-acquired expertise in a direct way.

23. Theses in Latin American Studies at British Universities in Progress and Completed (London, Institute of Latin American Studies, 1967), and ibid. (1969 and 1970).

24. Parry Report, 47.

25. The Librarian of the London Institute, Bernard Naylor, is the Director of the Catalogue. don, Institute of Latin American Studies, 1967), and ibid. (1969 and 1970.

26. The titles published so far are: Simon Collier, Ideas and Politics of Chilean Independence, 1808-1833 (1968); M. P. Costeloe, Church Wealth in Mexico: A Study of the Juzgado de Capellanías in the Archbishopric of Mexico, 1800-1836 (1968); Peter Calvert, The Mexican Revolution, 1910-1914: the Diplomacy of Anglo-American Conflict (1968); Richard Graham, Britain and the Onset of Modernization in Brazil, 1830-1914 (1968),; Herbert S. Klein, Parties and Political Change in Bolivia, 1880-1932 (1970), and Leslie Bethell, The Abolition of the Brazilian Slave Trade (1970). Other volumes are in the press and in preparation. The series is edited by Professor David Joslin and Dr. John Street, both well-known Latin Americanists at Cambridge.

27. The Editorial Board of the Journal consists of the Directors of the Parry Centres, together with the editors, Professor David Joslin and the writer. It is edited from the London Institute.

28. The first two titles are: R. A. Humphrey, ed., The ‘Detached Recollections’ of General D. F. O'Leary (London, the Athlone Press, 1969) and Bernard Naylor, ed., Accounts of Nineteenth-Century South America: An Annotated Check-List of Works by British and United States Observers (ibid.) Other monographs are in press and in preparation.

29. For example, D. J. Robinson and D. Fox, Cities in a Changing Latin America: Studies of Urbanization in Mexico and Venezuela (London, 1969) and D. J. Fox, Tin in the Bolivian Economy (London), 1970). These two papers were originally given as lectures at a conference at the London Institute, and the Fund thought them sufficiently interesting to promote their publication. The offices of the Fund are at the London Institute.

30. At Essex, the academic departments and centres are grouped into four interlinked Schools of Study and are not, as in many British universities, divided into separate Faculties. Thus, there are Schools of Comparative Studies, Social Studies, Mathematical Studies, and Physical Sciences. In the School of Comparative Studies, Latin America is one of three geographical areas—the others are North America and Russia—which may be chosen, along with Britain, for disciplinary study in the second and third undergraduate years, after an introductory year. Such study may be in art, government, language, literature and sociology. The modern Language Centre provides intensive courses of one year in Spanish and Portuguese (Brazilian).

31. The first holder of the Chair was the distinguished Venezuelan parasitologist, Dr. Amoldo Gabaldón; the second, the well-known Mexican poet and scholar, Dr. Octavio Paz.

32. Third Annual Report of the Institute of Development Studies, 1968-69, 3.

33. See W. Wood, ‘The Manchester Course. A Course of Public Administration Studies for Government Officials of Latin Ameriman Countries,‘ Bank of London & South America Review, 3: 32 (Aug., 1969), 484-490.

34. Parry Report, 60.

35. Ibid., See also Hayter Report, 22.

36. It is true that during the 1952-62 period complete stagnation did not obtain but such developments as were possible depended largely on the generosity of Foundations and not of government.

37. Parry Report, 57.

38. Figures compiled from information supplied by the Association of Commonwealth Universities.

39. It maw be interesting to note that when new Centres of Asian Studies were set up after the Hayter Report, Chinese studies were established at Leeds, Japanese Studies at Cheffield and South East Asian studies at Hull, all three universities being in Yorkshire and easily accessible to one another. Inter-university collaboration benefitted from this choice. So far as Latin American studies are concerned, improvements in national communications in recent years make a similar result perfectly possible: at least six universities with Latin American interests are within an hour's travelling-time of London.

40. The Parry Report recommended this kind of development. See 29-31. The London Institute has now held five such courses, and they are an integral part of it sprogramme.

41. The considerable expansion in numbers of undergraduate students at the School of Oriental and African studies of the University of London in the early 1960s, a factor in the favorable view of its development in the eyes of the Hayter Committee, was a result of “intensive efforts by the School to interest teachers and sixth-form pupils in these studies.” Hayter Report, 26. In fact, virtually an extramural division of the School is now in existence, and its impact has bee nremarkable.

42. The Times, Oct. 16, 1962. Since this article was written the London Institute, in co-operation with the Hispanic and Luso-Brazilian Councils (Canning House), has received from the Leverhulme Trust Fund a grant for a period of five years to initiate a scheme of Schoolteacher Fellowships. Under this scheme, selected teachers from British schools will spend a sabbatical term at the Institute and Canning House on the study of Latin America, in order to be better-equipped to introduce a consideration of the continent intotheir curricula, or to extend it where it already exists.