Imperator set
The show must go on... And once again we couldn't stop, and another beautiful set of miniatures was born. What's it about - well, of course, it's about the Belle Epoque! And it also has a lot of unusual things in it - the Emperors of China and Japan are finally here. Have you seen the King of the Congo, the King of the Maori or the King of Tonga in other sets before? But still, this set is more about the Americas than anything else. You will meet representatives and uniforms of the USA, Mexico, Haiti, Cuba, Brazil, Argentina, Colombia, Chile, Venezuela, Bolivia, Peru. Let's remember a little bit what Latin America was in those years:
By the time Europeans arrived here, most of the territory of the Western Hemisphere was inhabited by Indian tribes living under a primitive communal system. In the centre and south of Mexico and Guatemala, as well as in South America along the Andean Plateau (from Venezuela and Colombia to the north of Chile, including Peru, Bolivia and Ecuador), the Maya, Aztec, Inca and Chibcha Indian civilisations had developed. In a number of respects they can be compared with the early civilisations of the East of the IV-II millennia BC. The first overseas expedition of Columbus (1492) marked the beginning of the discovery, conquest and colonisation of the Western Hemisphere by
Europeans. The main territories of South and Central America and Mexico in the late XV - the first half of the XVI century became part of the colonial empires of Spain and Portugal. In recent times, the term "discovery of the Americas" is often replaced by another - "meeting of cultures". Obviously, both formulas are fair and complement each other. It is indeed a meeting of different cultures and civilisations - Indo-American and European, with their subsequent synthesis. But it is also the opening of America to the rest of the world, and not just a "meeting" but a dramatic unequal clash between the two worlds, culminating in the enslavement of the Indian population by Europeans.
Over the centuries, a unique economic and social system emerged in the colonies of Latin America, where land was divided into large estates known as latifundias. These estates and their plantations had different management approaches: some by the mid-nineteenth century began to function as modern companies with a capitalist approach to management, while others retained old patriarchal and feudal traditions. Despite the diversity of management practices, the latifundias functioned fairly independently: their products met the needs of owners and labourers, with many working families living on the same plantation for decades under the patronage of the landowners. These communities were not only economically
significant, but also served as a unique socio-cultural and political organisation for many. Each such estate was like a small state with a ruling landlord and his vassals who were unconditionally loyal to him. The landowner provided his peasants with stability, protection and the basic resources of life, and in return demanded absolute obedience. For the inhabitants of such estates, their masters were far more authoritative than distant colonial administrators representing the crown in a distant capital.
At the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, caudillism for the inhabitants of Latin American colonies became not only an indicator of social status, but also a way of life, shaping everyday life for many social strata united by common interests, activities, values, and interpersonal relations. After several centuries under European rule, many colonial inhabitants continued to live in ignorance and poverty. In their eyes, landowners embodied the archetype of the powerful chieftain or head of the family: caring and generous, yet tough and unyielding. Most of them did not pay attention to the latifundistas' ulterior motives when they opposed state power, engaged in backstage games or fought for the
independence of their territories. The sacralisation of the leader's image became the basis of the relationship between the caudillos and their supporters, who, promising loyalty in return for protection and support, saw them as pillars of their traditions, values and habits. And this habitual way of life, they believed, was threatened by the changes imposed by the Spanish authorities.
At the beginning of the nineteenth century, the desire for independence in Latin America increased because of several factors. First of all, the Creoles, who made up a large proportion of local landowners and were born in the colonies but had European roots, were virtually excluded from participation in the political process. The dominant House of Bourbon in Spain tried to consolidate its power by forbidding Creoles from holding public office, while preferring to export bureaucrats directly from Europe. Later, when Spain came under Napoleon's occupation from 1808 to 1813, this led to a significant weakening of control over the colonies. This
decline in authority in Latin America provided further incentive for those who were already dissatisfied with European influence. In such an environment, the atomisation of the colonies accelerated: more and more landholdings existed as separate states with their own rulers, armies and economies. They were only formally subordinated to the colonial authorities.
Most Latin American states achieved independence after military confrontations between local caudillo chiefs, who were seen as protecting the interests of the population with their personal armies, and colonial rulers whose ability to centralise government and maintain territorial integrity had weakened over time. Such perennial military confrontation resulted in the newly formed nations of Latin America being closely tied to militarism in their initial periods of existence. The military often played a key role in political life, becoming dictators or part of military governments. In some cases, when a civilian came to the presidency, his decisions were still
dependent on the military or powerful landowners, whose support could be both gained and lost...
By the beginning of modern times, Latin America had passed through three major stages in its historical development. In just four centuries, from the early sixteenth century to the early twentieth century. - Latin America made the historical leap from the Stone Age of the primitive communal system and from the early civilisations of the ancient Eastern type to the stage of industrial capitalism, which took Europe millennia to achieve.
The reverse side of these processes was the extraordinary survivability of integrated elements of old, traditional structures within the framework of new ones. This led, along with the acceleration of bourgeois progress, to the prevalence of its conservative variants, and to the entrenchment of multiculturality, when the formation and development of the capitalist mode of production was combined with the preservation of components of pre-capitalist ways of life, with the presence of small-scale, patriarchal economy and even the primitive communal system of Indian tribes (in territories not developed by "civilisation"). This strengthened the contradictory development of society. At the beginning of the 20th century, the economy of the region was predominantly extensive agrarian and export-oriented (and partly based, where there were
conditions for it, on the export-oriented extractive industry). And the formation of industrial capitalism took place on the basis of this economy, not in spite of it. This complicated the general picture of socio-economic development. Latifundism prevailed in the village. Farms with an area of more than 1 thousand hectares owned at least 80% of agricultural land in Argentina, Brazil, Mexico and Chile. A similar situation was observed in other countries. The largest land masses were concentrated in a few hands. In Argentina, the 500 largest landlords owned 29 million hectares, and in Brazil 460 landlords owned 27 million hectares. As a rule, the farmer stratum was small. Close connection with the world market accelerated the capitalist transformation of the latifundist economy.
In many countries, the entire economy depended on the production of one or two export products, and the economy acquired an ugly, monocultural character. For example, Argentina became the largest supplier of meat and grain to foreign markets, Brazil and Colombia - coffee, Cuba - sugar, Chile - copper and saltpeter, Bolivia - tin, Uruguay - wool and meat, Central American republics and Ecuador - tropical crops, Venezuela - oil. The development of the agro-export complex led to the creation of a trade, transport and financial system to serve it. On this basis, a large, predominantly
commercial and financial bourgeoisie was formed. It became part of the landlord-bourgeois oligarchy, which, together with foreign capital, controlled economic and, in most cases, political life in the countries of the region. The actual monopoly of the latifundistas on land created landlessness of the bulk of the rural population, deepened their poverty, and hindered the development of production for the domestic market. The landowners had little interest in the intensification of production, in the efficient use of their lands, a significant part of which was not put into economic turnover. In the situation of a long-term favourable external market situation and favourable natural and climatic conditions, the land monopoly provided large landowners with high incomes, most of which were spent on non-productive needs. Being export-oriented, latifundism contributed to the subordination of the national economy to foreign capital…
Each tin soldier is handmade by the finest craftsmen in the industry.
Here are all 24 miniatures from the set.
(please click on the picture to learn more about each miniature and the character depicted)
Mahuta Tawhiao
Goyaałé
George Tupou II
of Tonga
Fateh Singh
of Udaipur
Albert Fairfax
of Cameron
Bahawal Khan V
of Bahawalpur
Pierre Nord Alexis
Mutsuhito
Guangxu
Dirk de Graeff
van Polsbroek
