1 For Bolton's view see Bolton, Herbert Eugene and Marshall, Thomas, Colonization of North America (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1920).Google Scholar For his famous address to the annual meeting of the American Historical Society (1932) see “The Epic of Greater America,” American Historical Review 38 (1933): 448–474.Google Scholar For Turner, see his “The Significance of the Frontier in American History” (1893), in Billington, Ray A., ed., The Frontier and Section (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1961)Google Scholar; see also Gressley, Gene M., “The Turner Thesis—a Problem in Historiography,” Agricultural History 32 (1958): 227–249.Google Scholar

2 As quoted in Hogan, William R., “Comment and Fallacies in the Turner Thesis,” in Lewis, Archibald and McGann, Thomas F., eds., The New World Looks at its History (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1963),pp. 127–131.Google Scholar The quotation is on page 127.

3 See their papers, ibid. It is significant that no historians of the United States presented papers during this portion of the congress.

4 For Webb see ibid. See also Webb, Walter Prescott, The Great Plains (Boston: Ginnard Company, 1931)Google Scholar, and The Great Frontier (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1952). For the relationship of the three historians see the light but valuable work by Jacobs, Wilbur R., Caughey, John W. and Franz, Joe B., Turner, Bolton and Webb, (Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 1965).Google Scholar

5 To understand the seminal importance of Bernard Moses see Hanke, Lewis U., “The First Lectureship on Hispanic-American Diplomatic History,” Hispanic American Historical Review 16 (1936): 399–402 Google Scholar; and Watson, James E., “Bernard Moses: Pioneer in Latin American Scholarship,” ibid. 42 (1962): 212–216.Google Scholar For Turner's influence on Bolton see Jacobs, Wilbur R., “Turner as I Remember Him, by Herbert Bolton,” Mid-America, new series, 25 (1954), no. 1: 54–61.Google Scholar

6 Bolton, , “Epic,” pp. 473–474.Google Scholar

7 Bolton, , “Epic,” p. 448.Google Scholar

8 Hayes' presidential address to the American Historical Society National Meeting of 1944, “The American Frontier—Frontier of What?” American Historical Review 51 (1945): 199-216.

9 For the comment on Turner see Hogan, , “Comment,” p. 127 Google ScholarPubMed; for that on Webb see Lower, Arthur M., “Professor Webb and ‘The Great Frontier’ Thesis,” in Lewis, and McGann, , eds., The New World, pp. 142–154 Google Scholar; the quotation is on pages 144-145.

10 As examples of such studies and the resultant enrichment of the field of Latin American history see the papers presented to the National Meeting of the American Historical Association (1941) as reprinted in the Canadian Historical Review 23 (1942); Brooks, Philip C., “Do the Americas Share a Common History?” Revista de Historia de América 33 (1952): 75–83 Google Scholar; Whitaker, Arthur P., “Introduction to the Project for a History of America,” Revista de Historia de América 43 (1957): 141–144 Google Scholar; Lewis and McGann, eds., The New World; Zavala, Silvio, “International Collaboration in the History of America,” Comparative Studies in Society and History 1 (1959): 284–287 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Hanke, Lewis, ed., Do the Americas Have a Common History? (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1964).Google Scholar Of course Bolton was not the first to propose a general history of the Americas as anyone familiar with Diego Barros Arana's Compendio de Historia de América 2 vols. (Santiago de Chile, 1865- 1866), and with José V. Lastarria's La América (Santiago de Chile, 1867) would attest. Bolton, and now Whitaker and Zavala, reopened the question and popularized the debate as Barros Arana and Lastarria were never able to do.

11 As quoted in Hanke, , ed., Common History, p. 46.Google Scholar

12 For such an approach see Freyre, Portuguese and the Tropics (Lisbon: Executive Committee for the Commemoration of the Vth Centenary of the Death of Prince Henry the Navigator, 1961); and Rodrigues, , Brasil e Africa (Rio de Janeiro, 1961).Google Scholar The Wisconsin program is described in that university's bulletins and broadsheets.

13 Fine work, of course, has been done on the influence of the British in Latin America. See as examples: Bunge, Alejandro, Ferrocarriles argentinos (Buenos Aires, 1918)Google Scholar; Ferns, Henry S., Britain and Argentina in the Nineteenth Century (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1960)Google Scholar; Manchester, A. K., British Preeminence in Brazil (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1933)Google Scholar; Pitte, Ernesto, Historia de un empréstito; La emisión de Buenos Aires de 1824 (Buenos Aires, 1962)Google Scholar; Platt, D. C. M., “British Bondholders in Nineteenth Century Latin America,” Inter-American Economic Affairs 14, no. 3 (Winter, 1960): 3–43 Google Scholar; Rippy, J. Fred, British Investments in Latin America (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1949)Google Scholar; Irving Stone, “British Capital in Latin America” (unpublished doctoral dissertation, 1962); and Tischendorf, A. P., Great Britain and Mexico in the Era of Porfirio Diaz (Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press, 1961)Google Scholar. These studies suggest the fertility of marrying the study of Latin American history with training in the history of the British Empire-Commonwealth.

14 For a photo of the Canning statue see Whinney, Margaret, Sculpture in Britain: 1530-1830 (Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1964), p. 165 Google Scholar of the plates. For the statue of Portales see Tornero, Recaredo, Chile ilustrado (Valparaíso, 1872)Google Scholar, facing page 21. For general comparisons of the British Empire and Rome see Bryce, James, The Ancient Roman Empire and the British Empire in India (London: Oxford University Press, 1914)Google Scholar; and Briffault, Robert, The Decline and Fall of the British Empire (New York, 1938).Google Scholar

15 For the addresses see Tocornal to the Cámara, 36th Extraordinary Session of 1875, December 11, 1875; for that of Palmerston see Southgate, Donald, “The Most English Minister” (New York, 1966), p. 272.Google Scholar Southgate quotes from the address and discusses the historical atmosphere in which it was presented.

16 For the British “Invisible Empire” see Galbraith, John S., “Myths of the Little England Era,” American Historical Review 67 (October, 1961): 34–48 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Robinson, Ronald and Gallagher, John (with Alice Denny), Africa and the Victorians (New York: St. Martins Press, 1961)Google Scholar. For the mutation of Chile's views towards the Atacama desert and for its shift from assurance to aggression see the author's unpublished dissertation “The Willingness to War” (1967). The changes of the countries' imperial attitudes are reflected clearly in Benjamin Disraeli's “Crystal Palace Speech” (1872) and Matta, Manuel A.'s La Cuestión Chileno-Argentina (Santiago de Chile: 1874)Google Scholar; Matta distinguishes between uti possidetis nominal and uti possidetis real. For Disraeli's address see Kebbel, T. E., ed., Selected Speeches of the Earl of Beaconsfield, 2 vols. (London, 1882), 2: 523–535 Google Scholar. Many have pointed previously to the similar patterns of Great Britain and Chile. See Horace Rumbold's La Inglaterra del Pacífico as printed serially in El Mercurio del Valparaíso (November, 1876); and Ernesto Quesada's La política chilena en el Plata (Buenos Aires: 1894). Quesada describes Chile as England, Bolivia as India, and Peru as Ireland; see pages 313-314.

17 For the British administration see: Beaglehole, John C., “The Colonial Office, 1782-1854,” Historical Studies, Australia and New Zealand (April 1941), pp. 170–189 Google Scholar; Knaplund, Paul, “Mr. Over-Secretary Stephen,” Journal of Modern History 1 (1929): 40–66 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Knaplund, Paul, James Stephen and the British Colonial System, 1813-1847 (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1953)Google Scholar; and, Morrell, W. P., British Colonial Policy in the Age of Peel and Russell (Oxford: 1930).Google Scholar The Spanish colonial policy has been studied extensively; see as examples: Molina, Cayetano Alcázar, Los virreinatos en el siglo XVIII (Barcelona: 1945)Google Scholar; Diffie, Bailey W., Latin American Civilization: Colonial Period (Harrisburg: Stackpole Sons, 1945)Google Scholar; Fischer, Lillian E., The Intendant System in Spanish America (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1929)Google Scholar; Haring, C. H., The Spanish Empire in America (New York: Harcourt, Brace, and World, 1952)Google Scholar; and, Smith, Robert S., The Spanish Guild Merchant, a History of the Consulado, 1250-1700 (Durham, N. C.: Duke University Press, 1940)Google Scholar. For an interesting study of the South African apartheid system see Hancock, William Keith, Smuts: 2—Fields of Force (Oxford: 1968)Google Scholar; for British trusteeship see Mellor, George, British Imperial Trusteeship, 1783-1850 (London: 1951)Google Scholar. Certainly an interesting comparison could be made of the British trustee system and the ideals of Bartolomé de Las Casas; for Las Casas see Hanke, Lewis, Bartolomé de Las Casas (The Hague: M. Nijhoff, 1951)Google Scholar.

Associated with such comparative studies is the fact that Hugnette, and Chaunu, Pierre's Seville et I'Atlantique, 1504-1650, 6 vols. (Paris: Instituí des hautes études de l'Amerique latine, 1955)Google Scholar has contributed greatly to the understanding of the “world frontier.” Should not the study of that same frontier thus be of aid in the full utilization of Chaunu's excellent work?

18 The basics of the answers to the above questions are known generally. For the primary factors underlying the attitude of the British government towards her merchants in Mexico and towards the House of Baring see Jenks, Leland, The Migration of British Capital to 1875 (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1927)Google Scholar. In brief, Jenks feels that the attitude of Lord Stanley shaped official policy during much of the sixties; see page 289. For the treaty negotiations one would have to study the attitude of Lord Palmerston toward the United States, while the Hay-Pauncefote Treaty can be explained only against the backdrop of the Boer War. To study the change of money-lending policies, one should probably start with an analysis of “The Report of the Select Committee of Loans to Foreign States, 1875,” Parliamentary Papers, vol. IX, 1875. Despite the basic views and facts which are now available to the historian of Latin America certainly more work can and must be done. The value of such intensive studies may be realized clearly by reading with care the excellent study of Bernstein, Marvin D., Foreign Investment in Latin America: Cases and Attitudes (New York, 1966)Google Scholar. Professor Bernstein considers certain aspects and results of the Select Committee Report of 1875, and his study has illuminated some otherwise murky areas of the history of Latin America.