The Backwardness of Iberia in European Context

At the dawn of the 20th century, Spain and Portugal stood as stark exceptions to Western Europe’s march toward modernization. While Italy already lagged behind Britain, Germany and France in development, the Iberian nations found themselves even further behind in nearly every measure of progress. Spain’s population grew from 16.5 million in 1875 to nearly 19 million by 1902, yet illiteracy rates remained shockingly high at 66.5%, only slightly improved from 75.5% a generation earlier. Approximately 70% of Spaniards still depended on agriculture for their livelihoods, with half the population residing in villages of fewer than 5,000 inhabitants.

Portugal presented an even bleaker picture – a predominantly agricultural society where 58% of workers toiled in fields, with industrial labor accounting for just 25% of employment. The Portuguese literacy rate stood at a dismal 30%, meaning seven out of ten citizens could neither read nor write. These statistics reveal societies frozen in time, where the Enlightenment and Industrial Revolution had made only superficial impressions compared to their transformative effects elsewhere in Western Europe.

The Uneven Industrial Footprint

Industrial development in Spain showed a strikingly uneven geographical distribution, concentrated almost exclusively in two regions: the Basque Country and Catalonia. The Basque provinces along the Bay of Biscay specialized in pig iron and crude steel production, while Catalonia and Mediterranean coastal areas hosted woodworking, olive oil processing and textile manufacturing. Barcelona alone accounted for 40% of Spain’s industrial output, standing as an island of modernity in a sea of rural tradition.

Portugal lacked even these regional industrial centers. Its economy remained overwhelmingly agrarian, dominated by large estates worked by landless peasants. The absence of meaningful industrialization created societies with stark class divisions – a small urban bourgeoisie and professional class existing alongside masses of rural poor and a tiny industrial working class concentrated in Lisbon and Porto.

Political Turmoil and the Rise of Radical Movements

The economic backwardness of Iberia shaped distinctive forms of social protest. In Spain, the moderate Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party (PSOE), founded in 1879 by Pablo Iglesias, and the General Union of Workers (UGT) established eight years later, pursued legal, peaceful means to improve workers’ conditions. Yet they struggled to gain traction beyond industrial pockets like the Basque Country, Asturias, Madrid and parts of Andalusia.

More radical movements flourished in this climate of discontent. Anarcho-syndicalists concentrated in industrialized Catalonia promoted general strikes as their primary weapon, while anarchists found followers among Andalusian farmworkers, peasants and artisans. Secret societies like La Mano Negra (The Black Hand), resembling Russian populist groups, employed terrorism – targeting landowners, government officials and clergy they blamed for popular misery. The 1910 formation of the anarchist Confederación Nacional del Trabajo (CNT) created Spain’s largest labor union, demonstrating the appeal of radical solutions.

Portugal saw similar radicalization, with republican movements gaining strength after successfully overthrowing the Brazilian monarchy in 1889. Secret societies like the Carbonária (modeled on Italian revolutionary groups) built extensive networks, culminating in the 1908 regicide of King Carlos I and Crown Prince Luís Filipe in Lisbon. This act of terrorism, carried out by Carbonária assassins, destabilized the monarchy and paved the way for the 1910 republican revolution.

The Restoration Monarchy and Its Discontents

Spanish politics from 1875-1902 operated under the Bourbon Restoration system engineered by conservative statesman Antonio Cánovas del Castillo. After the chaotic First Spanish Republic (1873-1874), Cánovas orchestrated the return of Alfonso XII, son of the deposed Isabella II. The new constitution of 1876 declared Roman Catholicism the state religion while theoretically guaranteeing religious tolerance, and established a parliamentary monarchy where power alternated between Cánovas’s Conservatives and Práxedes Mateo Sagasta’s Liberals.

This system proved increasingly dysfunctional. Electoral corruption remained rampant despite the 1890 introduction of universal male suffrage. The regime’s legitimacy suffered catastrophic damage from the 1898 Spanish-American War defeat, which cost Spain its remaining overseas empire (Cuba, Puerto Rico and the Philippines). Intellectuals of the “Generation of 1898” launched scathing critiques of the system, with philosopher Miguel de Unamuno famously calling parliament a “cathedral of lies.”

The Tragic Week and Colonial Disasters

Spain’s colonial troubles continued into the new century. Attempts to suppress rebellion in northern Morocco (a Spanish protectorate since 1904) led to the 1909 call-up of reservists, sparking violent protests in Barcelona. The ensuing “Tragic Week” saw anarchist-led riots, church burnings, and attacks on clergy, requiring military intervention that left over 100 dead. The execution of radical educator Francisco Ferrer Guardia, accused of instigating the violence, provoked international outrage.

Portugal faced similar colonial pressures, with continuous fighting in African territories draining finances and creating widespread military discontent. These colonial conflicts exacerbated both nations’ economic difficulties while fueling domestic radicalism.

The Path to Dictatorship

The political systems of both Iberian nations proved incapable of managing these multiple crises. Spain experienced 19 different governments between 1909-1923 before General Miguel Primo de Rivera established a military dictatorship in September 1923. Portugal’s First Republic (1910-1926) proved even more unstable, with 44 governments in 16 years, 20 attempted coups, and 300 bombings in Lisbon alone – a textbook case of what we would now call a “failed state.”

This instability paved the way for authoritarian solutions – Primo de Rivera’s dictatorship in Spain, and from 1926 onward, the military regime in Portugal that would eventually give rise to António de Oliveira Salazar’s Estado Novo.

The Scandinavian Contrast

The Iberian experience stands in sharp contrast to contemporary developments in Scandinavia, where Denmark, Sweden and Norway navigated the challenges of modernization more successfully. Though similarly late to industrialize, these Lutheran countries benefited from widespread literacy (thanks to state church education systems), cooperative agricultural models, and gradual political reforms. Denmark’s 1915 constitution granting full female suffrage represented a high-water mark of progressive legislation, while Sweden’s Social Democrats pioneered welfare state policies.

Key differences included Scandinavia’s free peasantry (unlike Iberia’s landless rural proletariat), greater social mobility, and political systems that successfully integrated emerging labor movements through reform rather than repression. The absence of a militant anarchist tradition and more equitable land distribution created societies better equipped to manage modernization’s discontents.

Legacy and Lessons

The early 20th century struggles of Spain and Portugal reveal the perils of incomplete modernization. Both nations possessed the formal trappings of constitutional government, but lacked the social foundations – educated citizenries, diversified economies, and inclusive political cultures – necessary to make these systems function effectively. The result was political instability, social violence, and eventual authoritarian solutions.

These historical experiences continue to resonate. Contemporary discussions about democratic backsliding, the challenges of economic development, and the social tensions created by uneven modernization all find powerful precedents in the Iberian experience of a century ago. The contrast with Scandinavia’s more successful adaptation to modernity suggests that cultural factors – particularly education systems and land distribution patterns – may prove as important as political institutions in determining a nation’s developmental trajectory.

Ultimately, the story of early 20th century Spain and Portugal serves as a cautionary tale about the difficulties of achieving genuine modernization when economic transformation outpaces social and political development – a lesson with enduring relevance for developing nations today.