Viceroyalty

A viceroyalty was an entity headed by a viceroy. It dates back to the Spanish colonization of the Americas in the sixteenth century.

British Empire

India

• India was governed by the Governor-General and Viceroy of India from 1858 to 1947, commonly shortened to "Viceroy of India".

Ireland

• Ireland was governed by the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, who was the representative of the British Monarchy in Ireland from the Williamite period until independence, was also called the Viceroy of Ireland.

France

• Viceroyalty of New France

Portuguese Empire

In the scope of the Portuguese Empire, the term "Viceroyalty of Brazil" is also occasionally used to designate the colonial State of Brazil, in the historic period while its governors had the title of "Viceroy". Some of the governors of Portuguese India were also called "Viceroy".

• Viceroyalty of Brazil
• Governors of Portuguese India

Russian Empire

• List of viceroyalties of the Russian Empire

Spanish Empire

The viceroyalty (Template:Langx) was a local, political, social, and administrative institution, created by the Spanish monarchy in the sixteenth century, for ruling its overseas territories.<ref>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref>

The administration over the vast territories of the Spanish Empire was carried out by viceroys, who became governors of an area, which was considered not as a colony but as a province of the empire, with the same rights as any other province in Peninsular Spain.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>

Europe

Name	Capital or main city	Dates	Later status
Viceroyalty of Aragon	Zaragoza	1517–1707	Integrated into the Kingdom of Spain
Viceroyalty of Catalonia	Barcelona	1520–1716	Integrated into the Kingdom of Spain
Viceroyalty of Galicia	Santiago de Compostela	1486–?	Integrated into the Kingdom of Spain
Viceroyalty of Majorca	Palma de Majorca	1520–1715	Integrated into the Kingdom of Spain
Viceroyalty of Naples	Naples	1504–1707	Ceded to Austria
Viceroyalty of Navarre	Pamplona	1512–1841	Integrated into the Kingdom of Spain
Viceroyalty of Portugal	Lisbon	1580–1640	Achieved independence as Portugal
Viceroyalty of Sardinia	Cagliari	1417–1714	Ceded to Austria
		1717–1720	Ceded to Savoy
Viceroyalty of Sicily	Palermo	1415–1713	Ceded to Savoy
Viceroyalty of Valencia	Valencia	1520–1707	Integrated into the Kingdom of Spain

America and Asia

Name	Capital or main city	Dates	Later status
Viceroyalty of New Granada	Santa Fe de Bogotá	1717–1723	Integrated into Peru
		1739–1810	Achieved independence as New Granada
		1815–1822	Achieved independence as Colombia
Viceroyalty of New Spain	Mexico City	1535–1821	Achieved independence as Mexico
Viceroyalty of Peru	Lima	1542–1824	Achieved independence as Peru
Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata	Buenos Aires	1776–1810	Achieved independence as Argentina
Viceroyalty of the Indies	Santo Domingo	1492–1535	Became the Viceroyalty of New Spain

Controversy over whether the American Viceroyalties were Colonies or Provinces

According to the lawyer Fernando de Trazegnies, the status of the Viceroyalties was like that of a Kingdom among the Kingdoms of the Indies, and that the fact that legal Pluralism was practiced in Derecho Indiano would be sufficient proof that the Crown did not seek to practice a Exploitative colonialism (where local institutions, which protect the socioeconomic rights of the Vassal people, are ignored, under the excuse of the Right of Conquest), if not political integration into the Hispanic Monarchy in the same plural way that had already been done with the rest of its territories in Europe, based on the characteristic Fueros of the traditional and composite Monarchy that maintained the regional laws of each nation integrated into the Spanish Monarchy (and that was even practiced within peninsular Spain after the Reconquista, such as the Fueros of Aragón or the Fueros of Navarra). This would be evidenced by the creation of the República de Indios in which the political traditions of indigenous customary law would remain alive as a state within the several states that made up the Composite Monarchy, or the desire of the Spanish conquistadors to make pacts with the Natural Lords of the new lands (indigenous nobility and chiefs) to legitimize the conquest in natural law and integrate them into the seigneurial system, respecting the sovereignty of the natives and their ethnic lordships, which could not be deprived of their rights and was only possible its annexation to the Spanish Empire through alliance pacts (whose conditions of such pacts had to include the part of the indigenous sovereign, protector of the common Indian).<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> Template:Quote At the same time, the Spanish Empire itself and the Council of the Indies did not perceive the American Viceroyalties as possessions analogous to the Factories or administrative Colonies, in the style of other empires with a more Mercantilist behavior towards the Natives of their non-European possessions, but rather perceived the Viceroyalties as overseas Provinces, with rights equivalent in hierarchy to those of the rest of the provinces of the Crown of Castile (according to the Laws of the Indies), of which they were an integral part.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> Even the word colony would not have been used in any legal document of the Spanish Monarchy with respect to the Indies until the 17th century, and after the arrival of the Bourbons it would be used in reference to its classic etymological sense of human settlements established in new territories, and not in the modern sense with connotations of economic exploitation.<ref>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref>

That would be reaffirmed in the late empire by official statements of the Supreme Central Junta (legal representative of occupied Spain in the middle of the Peninsular War).<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> Template:Quote Such statements would not have been questioned by American representatives in the Cortes of Cádiz, such as the Peruvian Vicente Morales Duárez.<ref>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref> Template:Quote However, there would still be historiographical debates in this regard, among those (the nationalist or colonialist school) who say that this was only De jure positions on paper, and not a De facto reality in social dynamics (the revisionist school). Authors such as Annick Lempérière consider that the “colonial” concept in Hispanic reality would have been an anachronistic concept that serves mostly an ideological use by historians (wanting to develop an idyllic vision of Spanish-American Independence) rather than to make a scientific description of the history of the Spanish empire, going so far as to question its apparent “objective” usefulness that modern historiography gave to the colonial concept to relate it to the causes of the Spanish-American Wars of Independence (that is, that there is an artificial consensus that American social formations, the Reinos de Indias and it's viceroyalties, have been institutionally formed for their economic exploitation and dependence on the metropolis, instead of being an integral part of the Empire like any extension of the Crown, just like its European dominions).<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>

See also

• Viceroy