The ‘Coloniality of
Power’
Socio-economic development and land rights in Bolivia
2
Summary
This paper aims to uncover the specific influence of colonialism on the development of ethnic divisions in Bolivia and how these divisions are determining contemporary land distribution in the country. Aníbal Quijano’s approach on the ‘coloniality of power’ is used to uncover the
racial system of hierarchy in the Bolivian distribution of land and its modern-day tenure
system, thereby lying bare the deeply entrenched racial mechanisms at the root of one of the most unequal land tenure systems in the world.
Crucial for understanding the modern land tenure system in Bolivia is the theoretical premise that decolonization of Bolivian social relations has not happened yet. Independence rather implanted the colonial state even further, by allowing for the continuation of the colonial institutions and permitting the colonial elites to stay in place. Decolonization was indeed a game changer, but in favour of the creole élite whom now received the endowments first destined for the Spanish Treasury and were hence from then on induced to oppress the indigenous peasant majority.
3
Preface
I grew up on a small island in the Caribbean. This island, together with other four islands, is known as the Dutch Antilles or the Dutch Caribbean. Dutch colonial history started in 1634, the year that the Dutch captured Curacao, Aruba, and Bonaire from the Spanish. In 1954 the colonial status of the islands was terminated and autonomy within the Dutch Kingdom was granted to them. I will not go into details about the legal nature of the Kingdom, it suffices to say that since 1954 the Dutch Kingdom is constituted of The Netherlands and the six islands in the Caribbean.
Like almost all Caribbean islands, the societies of these islands form a colourful melting pot of different ethnicities and cultures. The largest ethnic group on most islands are the afro-descendants of the slaves, brought to these islands by the transatlantic slave trade. What struck me the most when growing up was the attitude of certain groups towards the Dutch, the former colonist. A large part of everyday political, economic, governmental, but also cultural issues and problems today, are blamed on the colonial past and Dutch colonial rule.
As a native islander, I couldn’t help but wonder: Colonial times have ended, why not stop blaming and focus on solving problems? I wondered about why we were not able to emancipate ourselves from the thoughts and habits of blaming others for our problems; what is it that is keeping us from emancipation? But I also realised, what if there is really something keeping the people from looking ahead? What if indeed there exist some persistent societal structures excitant that do prevent emancipation? Hence, with all these questions in mind, I started my inquiry into the nature of colonialism and its possible long-term effects on a society. As my research continued, I stumbled upon a wide literary discussion on the nature and effects of colonialism on societies and their development, helping to further define my area of research. The current debate around colonialism is a very extensive one reaching deep into different scientific fields; international relations, economics, political sciences and even behavioural sciences, deeply intertwined with the discussion of socio-economic development.
4
Table of content
Introduction ... 5
1. Colonialism and socio-economic development ... 9
A discussion ... 9
2. Quijano’s “Coloniality of Power” ... 17
2.1 The colonial political economy: an all-encompassing economic structure with socio-economic and political consequences. ... 17
2.2 The coloniality of power, its reinforcement by Liberalism, and land tenure in Bolivia 22 3. The coloniality of power in Bolivia ... 25
3.1 Spanish conquest and the Reforms of Viceroy Francisco de Toledo, 1568- 1580 25 3.1.1 Demographic and social consequences of the Toledo reforms: the aftermath 31 3.2 The postcolonial state: race relations in republican Bolivia ... 36
4. The coloniality of power, land tenure and its influence on Bolivian socio-economic development ... 40
4.1 The distribution of land in Bolivia: the first decade of independence until the Chaco war, 1825 – 1932... 41
4.1.1 The Chaco war, the 1952 revolution, and the 1996 INRA Agrarian reform 46 5. Conclusion ... 54
5
Introduction
There is a large body of theories on the socio-economic development of nation-states, trying to provide answers for the socio-economic failure or success of nation-states. Within these theories, colonialism is attributed different roles with different socio-economic consequences. My interest in colonialism and the Latin American region triggered my personal interest in understanding the socio-economic consequences of such historical developments.
Along the process of research my attention was especially caught by the case of Bolivia. Bolivia is a country of many paradoxes. Today, Bolivia is still the poorest country of the continent, but nonetheless the global financial institutions classify Bolivia as a middle income country. Roughly two third of the total Bolivian population lives under the poverty line, of which a staggering 80 percent lives in rural areas (World Food Program 2015). Approximately one third of the total population lives on the countryside (World Bank, Index Mundi).
There is also a strong correlation between rural life and indigeneity on the one hand, and the strong negative correlation between indigeneity and poverty on the other hand. This means that, in Bolivia, living on the countryside almost automatically means being indigenous and poor (Jiménez Pozo, Landa Casazola and Yáñez Aguiler 2006, Velasques Castellanos 2007, Vos, Lee and Meijía 2008). The position of the Indigenous is one well known; one of structural poverty deprivation and discrimination. Considering that Bolivia has always had a large indigenous population of between 45 and 60 percent today1, this is striking. It causes one to wonder about roots of this obvious correlation between indigeneity and poverty, and about the role that colonialism may have had in the creation of this correlation.
Bolivian history, demographic, and socio-economic circumstances raise questions about the extent to which colonialism might have contributed to modern-day Bolivian local reality. One theory that provides a valuable starting point for analysing the contemporary colonial legacy of Bolivian colonial history is Quijano’s ‘Coloniality of Power’ approach (A. Quijano 2007, Quijano and Wallerstein 1992). By means of this approach he explores the possibility that the
1 Since the population survey held in 2011, there is a debate about whether Bolivia can still be considered a
6 Spanish colonizer superimposed new forms of domination on the pre-Columbian societies of the Latin American continent: the so-called systems of hierarchies. He argues that the new racial and paternalist systems of hierarchies have had great influence on current day social patterns in Latin American states, installing a “system based on racial classification and difference (Quijano 2007, 169)”. For Quijano, it was independence that materialised the soft cultural aspects of the creole colonial society, becoming rigid and hence more pronounced and influential. This study will concern itself with the racial system of hierarchy, a system which, according to Quijano, connected ethnic/racial backgrounds to the labour hierarchy.
Nonetheless, in order to understand the role of colonialism in Bolivian socio-economic history and its relationship to modern day society, and to better understand why Quijano’s theory has been provides a valuable starting point, one has to consider the debate about the influence of colonialism on socio-economic development; one that is momentarily heavily disputed. One side of the debate is represented by positivist theorists that mostly focus on qualitative data and on tangible factors such as for example institutions (Acemoglu and Robinson 2012), geographical and cultural explanations (Diamond 1997, Sachs 2012), path-dependency and factor endowments (Engerman and Sokoloff 2002, 2005). As much as these factors are definitely part of the equation, however, they do not consider the social component of development. Part of the large body of literature on economic development available also points out the influence of less tangible factors such as history and (international) structures, and social patterns such as racism and paternalism. The debate about the lasting influence of colonialism on modern day socio-economic development therefore hinges upon fundamental ontological and epistemological differences that exist between positivist and post-positivist approaches.
7 My research will therefore on the one hand explore the theoretical implications of Quijano’s approach and, on the other hand, put it to test on the case of Bolivia, by applying the following research question: “To what extent can colonialism be considered an explanatory
factor in the socio-economic development of Bolivia, considering de current debate/discourse?”
By asking this question, this paper aims to uncover the influence of colonialism instituted through the ethnic/racial system of hierarchy which was so fundamental in shaping Latin American societies. More specifically, it aims to uncover the influence of this specific system of hierarchy on contemporary distribution of land in Bolivia. Land tenure is seen as tremendously important for poverty alleviation through rural development, as it focuses on building people’s endowments of assets, enabling them to construct a more sustainable livelihood (The FAO 2002). As specified before, Bolivia has been chosen as object of study due to its distinct combination of socio-economic characteristics and the correlation that seems to exist between indigeneity and (rural) poverty.
Another intriguing aspect for choosing Bolivia as subject of research, is the election of President Evo Morales of indigenous descent in 2006. The election of Evo2 aired questions on whether it is finally time for the emancipation of the Bolivian peoples. But despite his achievements regarding indigenous rights, his position on nature conservation, and his anti-western and anti-neoliberal rhetoric and policies, he now seems to be at odds with his support base after six years of being in power. Why is that so? Additionally, a more practical argument: Bolivia has a large percentage of original inhabitants, characteristic for the country. It therefore means that it is more likely that possible colonial patterns can be determined and observed. Lastly, historical, social and economic documentation and literature on Bolivia is plentiful.
The first chapter of this thesis extensively explores the debate on colonialism and its influence on socio-economic development in general and reflects upon Bolivia’s contemporary socio-economic characteristics, providing the necessary context for the study. Both sides of the debate are taken into consideration, and the theoretical implications are discussed as well. The second section comprises the theoretical framework for this study, settling for the more post-modern understanding of colonialism introduced by Aníbal
8 Quijano: the concept of “Coloniality of Power”. This section also elaborates upon the origins of this distinct post-colonial approach, having economic, structuralist roots. The third section comprises a case study on Bolivian society, aiming at uncovering racial, colonial social patterns originating in colonialism, influencing socio-economic development today.
Methodologically, this paper is of qualitative nature. A historical analysis will be performed aiming to identify the longue dureé formation of the racial system of hierarchy, Quijano’s system based on racial classification and difference. This methodological approach is preferred due to its focus on long-term historical structures, prioritizing slowly evolving structures instead of events, making it a useful method to analyse the impact of colonialism on socio-economic development of contemporary societies, especially social structures so deeply entrenched as racial discrimination. The methodological goal of this dissertation is to show that the social history matters, for as Michel Cahen puts it, “research cannot be done in isolation of social history” (Cahen 2013, 8).
Additionally, this thesis aims to contribute to the discussion of the influence of colonialism on contemporary socio-economic development. There is much evidence that colonialism indeed has been very influential, however, understanding of the mechanisms through which it works is limited. History has shown that racial discrimination can lead to structural marginalization of population groups, but its origins and workings are poorly understood. More specifically, this study aims to elucidate the specific influence of the colonial legacy on contemporary society and the modern land tenure system in Bolivia. Traditional mainstream post-colonial studies have been valuable in providing insights on colonialism and its long-term cultural legacies; nonetheless they remain limited in their analysis. By applying Quijano’s theory, this paper aims to shed some light on internal mechanisms propagating colonial socio-cultural hierarchy, in other words, applying a non-traditional post-colonial theory to uncover to what extent contemporary social divisions can be traced back to colonial times.
9
1. Colonialism and socio-economic development
A discussion
In recent years research has made significant progress in determining the importance of historic events for socio-economic development of states, predominantly focussing on colonialism as a main determinant (Nunn 2009). In order to comprehend what the influence of colonialism has been for Bolivian socio- economic development, one has to consider the debate centred on colonialism itself. Additionally, this progress, even though significant in its recognition to the historical importance of colonialism, still fails to give enough weight to the colonialism as a determinant factor for national contemporary socio-economic factors in general. The discussion on the influence of colonialism has to be viewed in the context of Bolivia, considering its specific properties and particularities. What are the different ethnic divides that characterize Bolivia? And what does this mean for its national socio-economic development? What is the relation between indigeneity and one’s socioeconomic position?
This chapter gives an overview of the scientific discussion on colonialism and its historical significance, using Acemoglu and Robinson’s book “Why nations fail” as a starting point.
In his 2009 article, Nunn gives a clear overview of the contributions relating to research on colonialism: Engerman and Sokoloff (2002, 2005), Acemoglu, Johnson, and Robinson (2001, 2005), Acemoglu and Robinson (2006, 2012), Banerjee and Iyer (2005), and Nunn (2007, 2008) all researched the economic impact of colonialism on long-term (socio) economic development, although they focus on different lines of inquiry. Engerman and Sokoloff mainly focus on factor endowment and colonial rule, while Acemoglu, Robinson and Johnson as well as Banerjee and Iyer concentrate upon the role of institutions and their historic evolution. Agreeing with Nunn, one can identify a shift in the literature moving from “asking whether history matters to asking why history matters” (Nunn 2009, 2).
10 the poverty of others are predominantly explained by the path dependent evolution of economic and political institutions. In doing so, they break with the old standard competitive model which assumes that free-markets are the only necessary ingredient for a well-functioning economy (Bentley MacLeod 2013, 118). Instead, their book argues that it is the allocation of power that is determinant for economic development.
The core of their arguments rests upon the presumption that there is a strong synergy between political and economic institutions. The right political circumstances during the course of history will lead to the creation of inclusive political and economic institutions, benefitting society as a whole. The national political and economic institutions are historically path-dependent; “different patterns of institutions are deeply rooted in the past because once society gets organized in a particular way, this tends to persist (2012, 44). The first core variable is referred to as the economic institutions present in a country which either can be inclusive or exclusive.
Inclusive economic institutions generate economic growth by allowing/encouraging the participation of “the great mass of people in economic activities that make best use of their talents and skills” enabling individuals to exercise freedom of choice (2012, 74). The writers argue that inclusive economic institutions must feature secure property rights, an unbiased system of law, public services provided by the state so that a level playing field is created, a free and inclusive market characterized by free exchange and contract, and a guarantee for free choice of career for the people (2012, 75). Of these features having secure property rights is the most important, since without property rights there will most likely not be invested in the land and hence productivity will not increase. It is important to note the role of the state; the authors explicate that economic institutions rely on the state. The state is the only institution with the “coercive capacity to impose order”, enabling it to prevent theft and fraud, and is able to enforce contracts and to provide for public services (2012, 76).
11 centralized. Consequently, due to their mutual interconnectedness extractive institutions are likely to persist; they support each other (2012, 82). The authors conclude that there is no recipe for the creation of institutions that foster prosperity. Instead it seems to be a gradual process resting upon a number of social-political and historical factors.
Acemoglu and Robinson’s book did not only receive extensive praise, it also received widespread critique which centred mostly around two points: firstly, the authors discredit the geography and culture hypothesis for being empirically not plausible. Their dismissal of the geography hypothesis in chapter two “Theories that don’t work” has sparked a lively polemic between the pro-institutionalists and the pro-geography camp, which can be traced back to the beginnings of the new millennium. Within the pro-geography camp, Jeffery Sachs has remained one of their most notable critics. He scrutinizes the discrediting of geography as a factor; according to him geography is indeed a prime determinant for a country’s socio-economic development since it relates to the natural endowment of a nation, its population size, the local agricultural possibilities, etcetera; all factors that certainly have consequences for the economic prosperity of nations (2003, 2012). Adding insult to injury, Putterman notices that Acemoglu and Robinson themselves make indirect use of this hypothesis in the form of the ‘density factor’: a factor that they created and was decisive for the population density of colonizer settlements, which at that time “created space for European settlement” implying that geographical consideration did matter for the settlers and their choice of settlement (2013, 471).
The second point of critique relates to how the authors present their theory; as a uni-causal explanation for socio-economic development. Many cannot agree with their standpoint since political organisations simply cannot be the only possible answer (Jared 2012, Sachs 2012, Putterman 2013, Bentley MacLeod 2013). Sachs (2012, 150) also points out that the key to understanding development has to do with the myriad of ways in which geography, culture, economics and also politics can possibly interact. Putterman (2013, 471) explicitly calls for a more multifactorial system of explanations.
12 seems to be based, attributes a leading role to colonialism through exactly those institutions central in their latest book (Acemoglu, Johnson and Robinson 2005, 2001, Acemoglu and Robinson 2000, 2006). As indicated before, in his 2009 article Nunn denotes that colonialism is increasingly seen as a main determinant for the course of history.
Most of sub-Saharan Africa is in itself an example in which colonization should be seen as the main cause of the formation of extractive institutions, not as an additional factor. And what about Latin America? Latin America can be considered to be the continent for which colonialism has been decisive for its socio-economic development; it rather seems to be the determinant factor. Wallerstein’s world systems approach was one of the first to connect the world capitalist system to the conquest of the Americas, more specifically Latin America (Wallerstein 1974, 83). In his later works he connected the colonisation of Latin America to racism and sexism (Wallerstein 1995, 102). Wallerstein and Quijano took a step further by arguing that with the conquest of America a new geo-social entity was created which became constitutive of the modern-world system and that, without the Americas, there could not have been a capitalist world economy (Quijano and Wallerstein 1992).
It is clear that there is an extensive debate going on about the subject of socio-economic development and the variables contributing to it. The previously enumerated arguments and critique refer to only one side of the existing debate on the impact of colonialism on socio-economic development. This debate stems from the well-known philosophy of science debate at the basis of many discussions: the positivist vs. post-positivist lenses of perception. By some scientists it is referred to as the ‘Third debate’ and by others as the ‘Fourth debate’. The arguments enumerated until now are a clear example of the positivist side of the debate.
13 Hence, also the above described debate on colonialism clearly takes place within the contours determined by positivist oriented theories, concerned with causal relationships in an externally objective reality. Acemoglu and Robinson’s book and the discussion expounded previously could be categorized as an expression of the dominant paradigms of modernity which according to Berman, are more concerned with the “the reproduction of uncritical and idealised models of liberal democracy, the market, and civil society” (1998, 307). They fail to appreciate the historical, local, cultural and particular circumstances of ex-colonial countries. The influence of colonialism on the economic development of nations has been much more extensive than can be traced back in the current positivist debate. Territoriality was imposed on these nations through the imposition of arbitrary boundaries and the indigenous peoples subjugated by means of a complete domination of these indigenous societies.
Wallerstein’s economic structural approach already takes as step in the direction of considering colonialism as a social phenomenon and colonialism has been the centre of attention for many other research traditions such as post-modernism, post-structuralism, feminism and most notably post-colonialism. These theories do not always necessary relate to socio-economic development in an explicit way, instead they rather touch upon the impact of colonialism on the daily individual lives, in other words, the consequence of colonialism for the social structures exert a much less tangible effect upon socio-economic development. These approaches have served to point out the importance of constructions of identity, the effects of patriarchy on society, and the importance of race in imperial and post-imperial power structures. Thus these approaches have definitely an impact on socio-economic development; they are about people and their particular experiences.
To better understand the effects of colonialism on a nation it is important that one can zoom into the local peculiarities. The international institutionalization of colonialism had local consequences, creating a different experience in all the different areas of local, individual life. The contrast between African and Latin-American colonialism present in itself a rough example; the continents were colonized in a different timeframe and under different circumstances, nevertheless both continents were victims of the same phenomenon called colonialism. More importantly even, these different circumstances created very different dependency dynamics.
14 regard to its influence on socio-economic development. Since positivist approaches are rather interested in zooming out and look for correlations, post-positivist approaches offer a tool enabling the researcher to zoom in into certain phenomena, distilling the ‘exceptional’ characteristic to their own situation. Explanatory power is provided by the way particular patterns of interaction are configured in a certain context (post-positivist approaches), rather than the operation of single causal variables (positivist approaches); it is a “specific combination of characteristics rather than the sum of them” that is determinant for the further development of former colonial nations (Cahen 2013, 7). Therefore, the next section briefly summarises Bolivia’s contemporary socio-economic and ethnic picture, deemed necessary for better understanding and contextualization of colonial impact on modern-day society.
Bolivia has a distinct configuration of ethnicities and has also known a peculiar socio-economic development path. The World Bank categorizes Bolivia as a lower middle income country. The most recent data on Bolivian socio-economic development state dates from 2011. Traditionally Bolivia has had a large rural population, but their numbers have been shrinking. In 2011 31,9 percent of the total Bolivian population lived in rural areas (World Bank 2015). Although there is no data on urban poverty, there is a large gap between the national poverty line and the rural poverty line of 61,3 percent (2011) and 45 percent (2011) respectively (World Bank).
Bolivia has a very ethnically varied landscape and especially indigenous communities have suffered longstanding subjugation and exclusion. The most obvious and visible ethnic divide remains between the indigenous and the whites. Those who are “Europeanized”,
mestizo-criollos, or also locally known as the “q’aras”, belong to the ethnic category of
whites. (Gissetquist 2005). The census of 2001 revealed that 62.05 percent of the Bolivian population identified itself as being of indigenous descent and the rest as non-indigenous. Even though this is the most salient division, there are also other highly salient ethnic divisions, depending on the degree of racial and cultural mixing: indigenous, mestizo and white. There is even distinction being made between cholos and mestizos, both being
mestizos, the cholo would however be more indigenous, and the mestizo more western in its
practices.
15 of the total indigenous population according to the 2001 census. Only a total of 6.9 percent of the total population consists of Lowland indigenous groups, and even so they are a very diverse group. There are also other types of divisions that have an ethnical dimension or coincide with ethnical fault lines. These can be perceived along regional lines (kollas of the Altiplano and cambas from the lowlands), economic differences such as the rich and poor, classes, occupational groups, different sectors, etcetera.
In 2011 another census was held. Surprisingly enough it revealed that the majority of the population now identified itself as having a mixed-race background and that the people who considered themselves to be indigenous had dropped by a stunning 20 percent , falling to a 40.3 percent of the total population. Experts suggest that these differences could have arisen out of differences in the way questions were asked, thus creating a response bias. It could however also have been caused by different interpretations on how the new generations perceive themselves (Mallén 2013, Ratzlaff 2014, Shahriari 2013, Courcy 2012).
Of all the cleavages, class and ethnicity seem to largely overlap in Bolivia (Albó 2008). The poor versus rich divide coincides to a large extent with the indigenous versus white or
mestizo lines, placing the indigenous in the lower poor classes and the whites and mestizos in
the upper classes. This division is very much visible in both hard numbers and also in popular perception. Feiring (2003) specifically addresses this issue of poverty amongst the indigenous in a macro-study on poverty and indigenous communities is Latin America, including a case study on Bolivia, confirming that indigenous women and men are represented disproportionally amongst the poor. According to the census of 2001, an overwhelming 74.04 percent of the workers in the agricultural sector and fishing are indigenous and a 60.28 percent of the total population indigenous population indicated to be self-employed (Gissetquist 2005, 6).
17
2. Quijano’s “Coloniality of Power”
The presupposition of this study is that colonialism should be seen as an overarching economic structure that determined the preconditions within which society developed. There are several arguments for taking on such a point of view: In the first place, European expansion was driven by economic reasons; the European powers were simply looking for possibilities to increase their revenues. Spain and Portugal’s competition towards finding the additional resources and riches in order to mitigate the effects of some external economic shocks suffered in the fourteenth century, contributed to the European expansion that would late on transform into full scale colonization of the newly discovered territories (Williamson 1992, de la Pedraja 2005, Chaunu 1979, Palmer, Colton and Kramer 2007). Hence, Europe’s adventures across the globe were largely economically motivated.
Secondly, and consequently, from the first moment of colonization, the economy of the colonies was geared towards the external market: the colonial political economy adhered to by the metropole was of such nature that the economy became the main organizing principle/structure of society. Society was therefore socially organized around the prevailing thoughts of that time; namely: the sole purpose of the colony was to cater to the needs of the metropole. With the conquering of the New World and as a consequence of the predominant economic rationale, a totally new social hierarchy was put in place, of which the consequences can still be felt today. This colonial legacy is the main reason why, even today, the socio-economic circumstances of the Latin American continent lag behind. Section 2.1 explores the theoretical implications of colonialism as an economic structure and its implicit impact on the socio-cultural and political development of society as a response to the global capitalist modernity that started coming into being with the discovery of the Americas. It is within this context one must think about colonialism.
2.1 The colonial political economy: an all-encompassing economic structure with socio-economic and political consequences.
18 material base of society. He also believed that the social and political institutions, known as the superstructure, are intimately connected with the economic base. He therefore also believed that economic forces drove, and hence determined, social and political change. With his ideas, Marx (and others) established the idea of a relationship between international, economic variables on the one hand, and local, national, social, and political environments on the other.
Although Marx was heavily criticized, his ideas have served to inspire many. An example of an influential modern day scholar is Immanuel Wallerstein. Building upon Marx-historical materialist approach, Wallerstein believes that the contemporary world-system is divided into a core, a periphery, and a semi-periphery. The Western countries belong to the core, where historically the most advanced economic activities take place, and the periphery is tasked with providing the core with raw materials and cheap labour in order to fuel the core’s economic expansion. The semi-periphery has characteristics of both categories. With his approach, Wallerstein puts the capitalist West in a global perspective, by taking an important step beyond the Eurocentrism characteristic to classical Marxism, and challenged the classical Marxist presumption that capitalism promoted economic growth everywhere (Linklater 2009, 123).
Wallerstein’s principle World Systems Theory focuses primarily on the development of the capitalist world economy, foremost concerned with an international level of analysis. Nevertheless, in his other works he also delves into the social and political developments occurring as part of the evolution of the exploitative capitalist world-system (Linklater 2009, 138). According to Wallerstein, the historical capitalist system originating in late-fifteenth century Europe has everything to do with the social and political processes of a society (Wallerstein 1995, 19). This becomes apparent in his later work published in 1983 ‘Historical Capitalism’, in which he elaborates upon social and political developments, as generated by the global capitalist economy. According to him, capitalism is not only an economic system, it is a “historical social system” (1995, 40). As a social system, historical capitalism led to the creation of the ideological framework of oppressive humiliation, known today still as sexism and racism, (1995, 102). He emphasizes that racism and sexism surely were not new phenomena; nevertheless, according to him they manifested themselves in new forms.
19 103). From then on, the ‘colour’ line socially defining one’s place in the world hierarchy (1995, 79), making one wonder as to why these forms of social oppression are kept institutionalised in the first place. Wallerstein answers by pointing to their biological nature; ethnicity is based on biological features, hence as they are always visible, these phenomena have become very persistent and tenacious social constructions, difficult to dismantle (1995, 103). As morally unacceptable as it may be, from then on, physiological unchangeable characteristics determined what social structures were put in place for an indefinite period of time, fixing the social fabric of a society.
In his earlier writings Wallerstein had argued that the historical capitalist system originated in late-fifteenth century Europe. To broaden his Eurocentric approach to the development of the modern capitalist world economy, he and his Latin American colleague Aníbal Quijano looked at the role that the discovery of Latin America played within the development of the global system. They conclude that for the system to expand and become a capitalist world-economy covering the entire globe, as is the case today, three requirements were of essence: 1. “an expansion of the geographical size of the world in question”, 2. “the development of variegated methods of labour control for different products and zones of the world-economy”, 3. “the creation of relative strong state machineries in what would become the core-states of this capitalist world economy” (Wallerstein 1974, 38). For them, the Americas provided for the first two, differentiating the newly discovered continent from the situation in East-Central Europe due to the widespread destruction that took place during colonization of the Americas, in other words, when incorporating the Americas into the periphery.
Quijano and Wallerstein (1992, 549) hence maintain that the colonizers had full and complete freedom to install the economic and political institutions they saw fit, due to the widespread destruction and by the importation of African labour. It left little room for possible cultural resistance to the oppressive conditions introduced. I would like to nuance this proposition a bit; the freedom that the colonizers had was somewhat restrained at that point in time, because they were somewhat restrained by the mandate bestowed upon them by the Spanish King and Queen. In more than one occasion the Spanish metropole tried to intervene in colonial affairs through the application of reforms or other severe measures, such as expelling the Jesuits for example, in order to prevent different parties from becoming too powerful (Williamson 1992, de la Pedraja 2005, Chasteen 2011).
20 the practises of the historical capitalist social system were implemented to a new extent, including the racist, social patterns describes before (Quijano and Wallerstein 1992, 549). In the Americas, combined with the possibility for a ‘blanco’ start, it culminated in a peculiar newness particular to ‘Americanity’ as a concept.
Quijano uses these insights for his later theoretical explorations, posing that as much as the colonial status of Latin America was terminated in the eighteenth century, coloniality itself did not end. According to the author, it continued to exist in the form of a sociocultural hierarchy characterized by European supremacy; the so-called ‘hierarchy of coloniality’ (Quijano 2000, 550). The ‘hierarchy of coloniality’ closely resembes the ‘double colonialism’ concept used by Williamson in which he refers to the inequality of creoles3 in relation to the Spaniards, the peninsulares, but also the even worse inequality between Indians and non-whites in relation to the creoles themselves (Williamson 1992, 166). There are two important facts that have to be emphasized: first, this hierarchy manifested itself in all possible domains; from politics to economic, not the least in culture. Secondly, the hierarchy started to reproduce itself over time, making coloniality an essential element in the integration of the interstate-system; if everybody believes it and lives by it, it will reproduce itself automatically, hence resembling Gramsci’s concept of cultural hegemony.
According to Quijano and Wallerstein ethnicity had a central role in colonial life. The authors define ethnicity as the setting of communal boundaries “into which in part we are put by others, in part we impose upon ourselves, serving to locate our identity and rank within the state” (Quijano and Wallerstein 1992, 550). This definition resonates closely with Wallerstein’s definition of racism, defining it serving as a mode “by which various segments of the workforce within the same economic structure were constrained to relate to each other” (Wallerstein 1995, 78), albeit this one focussing more on the economic aspect for the institutionalisation of racism. According to Quijano and Wallerstein, ethnicity played an important role in the process of racialization that took place in Latin America. During the colonial period ethnicity served as a way to legitimize relations of domination based on a person’s ethnical background, enforced by the sexist labour division, and hence it determined one’s social status within society. Gradually, and especially after the official ending of colonialism, ethnicity came to be reinforced by conscious and systematic racism as a means of legitimizing and continuing the exciting patterns of domination (Quijano 2000, 551).
3 In this case being creole refers to being a non-European born white person. Creoles have European heritage,
21 Essentially, racism was brought to life in order to differentiate between the colonizer and the colonized, based on supposedly racial differences (Quijano 2008, 533).
Ethnicity and racism should hence be seen as inevitable consequences of coloniality, corresponding with the division of labour seen to this day, serving to justify the multiple forms of labour control existing in Latin America; from slavery for the black Africans to indentured labour for the European working class. Its most important function was to culturally back up the economic hierarchy –read political and economic interests- that were weakening in the post-independence era, and to enable the élite to maintain its position in society (Quijano and Wallerstein 1992, 552).
Additionally, Wallerstein and Quijano posit that the concept of newness also contributed to the institutionalisation of these perverse, racist, social, and political practices. Because everything in Latin America was new, the new world was not burdened by any of Europe’s history, it feudal past and the old ways and traditions, nor any of its privileges. It definitely presented opportunities, but on the other hand the authors also stress that the absence of any of these aspects also meant that history, and the lessons learned from it, were not available as a teaching material. It justified a certain idea that in Latin America ‘all was permitted’ (1992, 552). The colonial power matrix came to affect all dimensions of social existence. Colonialism became coloniality, no longer reducible to the presence or absence of a colonial administration and decolonization therefore was no longer possible through just the elimination of the colonial administration (Grosfoguel 2002).
Building upon Wallerstein and his European theory of labour division, Quijano also argues that this new form of classification coincided with an also new form of labour control; a new structure that combined all the previously known structures of labour, such as wage labour, slavery, and serfdom; culminating in the systematic racial division of labour (Quijano 2000, 536). “It was articulated in such a way, that the two appeared naturally associated with each other” (Quijano 2000, 537), coming together to form the ‘coloniality of power’ matrix. Therefore, controlling a certain form of labour consequently entailed the controlling of a group on the produced social ladder. Hence, after independence, colonialism was continued through the social and political institutions remaining in place. In the words of Quijano, independence fixed the coloniality of the previous colonial state.
22 scholars who claim that decolonization in Latin America has yet to take place, albeit having slightly different views on nature of the colonial states.
Quijano and Wallerstein propose that decolonization fixed the stateness of the newly independent states (1992, 550). They argue that because of independence, the colonial socio-economic structures lost their fluidity and crystalized. As Quijano later reflects upon, colonialism continued in through the continuation of the social-cultural hierarchy that came to exist during the colonial period and never ceased to exist. Cahen qualifies the Latin American states therefore as states that became ‘independent without decolonization’; referring to the fact that independence did represent a political rupture with the past, but was in no means an anti-colonial movement (Cahen 2013, 22).
2.2
The coloniality of power, its reinforcement by Liberalism, and land tenure in BoliviaAfter independence, Bolivia was swept away by the liberal waves originating from the European continent. And although the liberators of Latin America aspired freedom for all, the ideology instead further contributed to further designating the indigenous to a subordinated category. How could this have happened? This specific nineteenth century development is extremely important to comprehend the continuation of colonialism as coloniality.
According to Rojas, the exclusion of the indigenous people was a coproduction of modernity, as modernity rejects non-modern ontological premises, an example being the union between nature and culture so much adhered to by indigenous cultures (Rojas 2013, 584). Already as early as the 16th century, the elites considered the indigenous people inferior to the western white male, hence allowing for the coloniality of power to be put in place. Hence, after independence, more general questions as to what the rights of the Indians were got a hold on the élites. Early sixteenth century scholars, such as Francisco de Vitoria, already argued that ‘they could only reach their full potential by adopting universal Spanish practices’ (Anghie 1996, 327); the word ‘they’ referring to the indigenous peoples. Nonetheless, it was supposed that acculturation within the Spanish culture would bring that, the reason why the indigenous were first incorporated into the encomiendas under the care and supervision of a Spanish lord or the church.
23 only to those considered members of a republican, democratic, and representative society (2003, 190). Although liberal ideology propagates ‘equality’, this does not automatically mean equality for all. Instead, it must be verified and demonstrated in each case (Rancière 1995, 65). Rojas (2013, 58) therefore concludes that the non-modern ontological presumptions at the basis of indigenous life therefore excluded the indigenous from the status of men or citizens; it excluded them prom participating in society. Hindess (2000) builds upon these premises arguing that it was exactly this distinction between those who counted and those who did not, that justified imperialism, authorizing Europe to govern its colonies in the name of civilisation. With independence, the élites, most of them descendants of Europeans, took over the civilizing mission (Rojas 2002). Laura Gotkowitz (Gotkowitz 2007) gives a concise description of how the Bolivian discussion on the rights of the indigenous developed itself in Bolivia after independence.
In modern liberal ideology even today landed property is considered to be one of those rights that contribute to being a citizen. World-wide having landed property had, and still has, a significant influence on a person’s position in society (next to education, economy, gender, and skin colour) (Lagos, Autonomy and power: Th dynamics of class and culture in Bolivia 1994, Lastrarria-Cornhiel 2009). It is associated with a certain status of citizenship, being as such a determinant criterion for exercising politics within a representative democracy. Those who are able to own landed property are considered to be full members of society, meaning that they are able to enjoy the full set of rights and public resources that society has to offer. In other words, owning property made them citizens, and hence, as the free Indian communities were not private property, the indigenous were not considered to be citizens (Lastrarria-Cornhiel 2009, 193, Irurozqui 1999, 723, Postero 2007, 27, C. Rojas 2013, 582, Ejdesgaard Jeppesen, Reading Bolivian landscape of Exclusion and Inclusion: the law of popular participation 2002).
24 indigenous in Bolivia found themselves in after independence (Lastrarria-Cornhiel 2009, 196).
25
3. The coloniality of power in Bolivia
How did the coloniality of power and the subsequent racial system of hierarchy come about? How did it influence the social and ethnic relations? In order to answer that question, the chapter focuses on the longue dureé formation of the ‘coloniality of power’, on how colonial society developed and on how the different societal groups developed, interacted, and responded to each other. We will see that over time the colonial system developed itself into a segregated system that allowed for a separation between the Indigenous and the Spanish world. We will see that certain historical events, such as the Toledo reforms, did have great influence on the development of the colonial system of hierarchy.
The Spanish colonial society, although separating the indigenous from the Spanish
conquistador according to certain criteria, did allow for flexibility and offered the indigenous
community many ways of escaping their colonial ordeal. Additionally, miscegenation between these two groups was inevitable, giving rise to another social category: the mestizo. Even though at first the mestizo category was strictly limited to persons born out of a Spanish and indigenous parent, the definition soon proved to be very fluid. The mestizo was not considered indigenous and therefore excluded from indigenous duties towards the Spaniards, therefore encouraging many indigenous to escape into the mestizo ethnic group. The definition of mestizo also became more fluid due to the loss of its racial connotation in favour of a more social definition
By the end of the colonial period, the system had determined social stratification of the colonial society; a response to Spanish social organization, were race was the dominant aspect for determining one’s position in society. The system had become a system of oppression and corruption due to the perverse incentives inherent to it, degrading the indigenous to a subordinate position. With independence, as the Spanish élite had now by long been replaced by a corrupt creole élite, whom got the opportunity to enrich themselves rather than the former metropole, the coloniality of power rigidified, fixing the colonial state in place. The colonial race relations became determinant for Bolivian local power relations.
3.1 Spanish conquest and the Reforms of Viceroy Francisco de Toledo, 1568- 1580
26 As the Spaniards arrived in the Andes, first in today’s Peru, they did not find empty space. Instead, they found well-established and sophisticated society (Ejdesgaard Jeppesen 2002, Quijano and Wallerstein 1992). Conquest was therefore a bloody and violent conflict typified by metal weapons, gunpowder, and horses. The Spanish technological supremacy permitted a relatively small army of several hundreds to overcome the large Indigenous armies. A contributing factor to the easy conquest was the fact that the Inca-empire was on the brink of a civil war and was thus vulnerable for influences from outside. This combination of Spanish military superiority and Indian assistance enabled the Spanish to mount a successful war of conquest and colonization.
Klein argues that “the future patterns of racial discrimination and class oppression were not yet apparent in the first phase of the Spanish conquest in the 1530s”, exactly because of Indian loyalties to the Spanish. However, the progressive hardening of Spanish rule and its increasing extraction of surplus resources from the Indian communities, fuelled anti-Spanish sentiment and rebellion (2013, 30). After a couple of years of increasing turmoil, in 1538 Francisco Pizarro brought about the last and total defeat of the remaining rebellious Indian factions; historically known as the great rebellion. This was an important defeat because, finally, some 6 years after the beginning of the conquest of the Andean region, the area of what was to become Bolivia had finally been subdued (2013, 31). Pissarro left his two brothers behind to start the full scale colonization of the region.
The defeat of the great rebellion marked a turning point in colonial rule as Spanish rule gradually became more oppressive. Klein points out that the Spanish had at first opted to leave the lands in the hand of the Indians and attempted to continue the Inca patterns of domination of indirect rule. This meant that traditional Indian societal organization, the
ayllu4, and the local Indian nobility were allowed to remain in place (Klein 2013, Ejdesgaard
4 The largest group of Indians living in upper Peru (today’s Bolivia) were the Aymara. In upper Peru
27 Jeppesen 2002, Albó 2008). In return, the goods and services that formally went to the Inca government were now paid to the Spaniards.
The Spaniards did institute an additional organizing principle parallel to the already existing forms of social and labour organization, the encomienda. The encomienda was a type of labour grant granted by Spanish Crown to the encomendero, grantee, which received the right to the locally produced goods and labour of the Indians. In return, he was responsible for their religious education and acclimatization into the Spanish culture. This system was originated in Spain during Roman times, with the purpose of protecting the vulnerable in exchange for a certain service. And although Klein (2013, 34) poses that the encomienda was principally meant to protect the Indians by preserving Indian society and government, the Charcas region was densely populated, and having discovered wealthy mines in Upper Peru, the Spanish authorities were very much aware of the importance of the region had.
Such grants were the single source of wealth that could be found in 16th century Peru. The system turned out to be a source for corruption and weak governance. By granting the
conquistadores power over the local people de facto a Latin American nobility was created
that assumed the position of governing authorities. The institutioning of the encomienda system can be seen as the start of a caste system; a system of hierarchy based on race as it connected race and ethnicity with class. It became a highly exploitative system in which the Indians were subjected to an extreme labour load (Klein 2013, 36). Tristan Platt considers this the start of “the colonial pact”, an implicit pact that legitimized the persistence of the indigenous peoples to the Spanish Crown and therefore letting them keep their own cultures, territories and organization as long as they paid taxes and provided for the necessary labour (Platt 1982).
28 overall revenue of the Spanish Crown (Ejdesgaard Jeppesen 2002, 34, Benson 2012, 1, Kohl and Farthing 2006, 38) and to provide workers in the mines (Benson 2012, Ejdesgaard Jeppesen 2002, Zulawski 1995, Klein 2013, Klaren 2000, Tandeter 1993).
In order to achieve his goals he implemented the following measures: 1. Toledo partially broke the century age old ayllu system by reducing the Indians into permanent fixed villages and converting them into nucleated communities, the so called reducciones and comunidades (Klein 2013, Benson 2012, Ejdesgaard Jeppesen 2002). Benson pertains that by placing the indigenous in the reducciones, the Spanish were able to increase their control and authority over them (2012, 9). Tandeter (1993, 21) and Klaren (2000, 60) confirm that concentrating the population in the new towns facilitated both the evangelization and the collection of tribute, establishing direct state control.
Especially the highland communities suffered from this measure, as it housed many ayllus with colonists in various other ecological zones which he forced to separate from their colonies and to regroup themselves into the more permanent larger settlements with fixed and adjacent lands (Klein 2013, 36). The Indians were thus gradually forced off their lands and obliged to live in a specific place. Through this reorganisation, he transferred direct control over the Indian population to the Spanish crown, away from the encomenderos, granting them little other purpose then being a source of labour and taxpayers (Kohl and Farthing 2006, 38).
In order to provide the much needed labour force Toledo revived an old pre-Columbian Inca levy system, the mita, which required all able-bodied men from specific districts to work in the Potosí mines for a period of a year, once every six years. The mita generated a good half to two thirds of the total labour force, about 13.500 men, at a very low cost. Klein (2013, 39) stresses that even though the miners were required to pay the mita labourers a small wage, this was not even enough for basic subsistence. The labourers and their families had to further carry the costs; they had to pay for their own transport to the mines and provide for their own food, and the family was left behind without an able income earner. Finegan emphasizes that the mita posed a serious threat to the Indian social structure throughout the colonial period. A fair amount of mitayos never returned home, either because of death or because they fled. Some Native American women uprooted their whole families in order to become wage workers themselves in the cities supporting the mines. Even Indian children worked the mines in order to help their family survive (Finegan 1999, 144).
29 them down the social pyramid, solidifying the connection between race and social status. The institutioning of the mita gave the definitive push to connect these two to one another. Spanish officials believed that, because of the intense physical labour that had to be done at a high altitude (4000 meters), only native Andeans would be up for the task (Golte 1980).
The high land communities were obliged to send one seventh of their male community to either work in the mines or on other projects for the Crown. It was the native elites that were forced to collect the conscripts, delivering them to the mines, and even making sure that the conscripts showed up for their mines duties (Cole 1985, 15, Blakewell 1984). Historical documentation points out that the indigenous leaders were heavily punished if they failed to provide the allotment of workers, having to pay the authorities the amount in silver needed to hire a replacement, a rule that was strictly enforced (Zavala 1980, 67-70, Sanchez-Albornoz 1978). Sanctions could even be worse. Community leaders were sometimes deprived of substantial personal property, they could be removed from office, or were often victims of physical abuse and imprisonment if they failed to comply (Garrett 2005, 126, Cole 1985, 44). Here we typically see that even though the local elite, the caciques5, were considered to be important, their cooperation was much needed by the Spanish. Nonetheless, they were not considered and treated as such. If needed, their cooperation was attained by applying coercion, with disregard of their elite status. Even so one has to note that the caciques and other indigenous authorities, albeit from a position of inferiority and as ambiguous as it might seem, provided the linkage between the white colonizers and the “republic of the indios” (Albó 2008, 17).
Bolivian colonial society was characterized by some peculiar features. One can almost say that there seem to be two societies coexisting within the same borders, or as if one was superimposed over one another, one dominating the other, Ejdesgaard Jeppersen also find a division within Bolivian colonial society stating that, to a certain extent, after the Toledo reforms, the Bolivian colonial stat gradually started to resemble ‘a bifurcated state’, a concept used by Mamdani (1996, 16) to describe the colonial state in Africa (Ejdesgaard Jeppesen 2002, 34). According to Mamdami, the bifurcated state is based on two different but interrelated systems of rule defined by location and space. In cities, centralized, direct rule was the norm, based on civil society and civil rights for all citizens. Let us not forget that the citizen referred to the white, male, literate population. On the countryside, however, indirect,
5 Indian nobility that got to keep their position as community leaders. They were exempted from paying tribute
30 decentralized rule was applied, based on violence and coercion, and the collaboration of rural tribal authorities, the community culture, and customary law (1996, 18-19).
Klein also notices this dual system, pointing out that the reforms, together with the granting Upper Peru’s own governing authority (the Audiencia de Charcas, separating it from Peru), effectively creating a “dual social, economic, and political system”. On the one hand there was a Western-oriented Spanish-speaking élite, which organized themselves more or less around peninsular class lines based on money and birth. Alongside this system, there is the more or less self-governing Indian peasant mass, but exploited by the other, and the interaction between the two is minimal (2013, 47). When implementing the mita, Toledo had beforehand specified who would be eligible for mita obligations. He himself had therefore created a caste system to classify the indigenous population subdividing them into three categories: the originarios6 or also known as tributaries, the forasteros or agregados
(foreigners) and the yanaconas (Benson 2012, 13, Klein 2013, 41, Albó 2008, 15).
When Toledo created this caste system he intended for the originarios to keep the land of their native settlement within the zone of the reducciones. They paid the highest tribute and, as mentioned, were susceptible to mita obligations (Benson 2012, 13). The forasteros, also sometimes called agregados were mostly immigrants from other indigenous communities and hence were given lesser land rights or no right at all, taking up residence as either landless labourers on plots of originarios (Klein 2013, 48, Albó 2008, 16), but were not exempted from paying tribute (Jackson 1999, 29). The yanacona class had Incan roots, originally meaning “workers without ayllu connections or land” and were hence assigned as servants to Incan nobles and officials (Klein 2013, 49). The Spanish however used the term differently, therefore by the end of the sixteenth century it simply came to mean landless worker.
The design of the class system further materialized and fortified the connection between race and ethnicity on the one hand and the labour structure on the other hand. The indigenous peoples are again, now more specifically categorized into the before mentioned classes. Here it has to be observed that these classes share certain characteristics: it is only the indigenous peoples that are categorized according these new classes, and, from then on they all are in
6 There is some vagueness about to whom exactly the originario-status was attributed. Initially the Spanish
31 service of the conqueror, their efforts al geared towards generating surplus revenue for the Spanish state treasury necessary to confront the international pressures Spain was facing at that time (Julien 2007, Spalding 1984).
3.1.1 Demographic and social consequences of the Toledo reforms: the aftermath
One can only imagine the demographic movements, economic consequences and the changes these reforms generated in Indian social organization. Because of the reforms, colonial society came to rely solely upon the Indian male head of the household, the originarios, to pay the required taxes, as he became the primary producer of the Charcas economy (Klein 2013, 49). The tribute formerly paid to the encomendero now went to the Crown. Next to the basic tribute tax, he was also the only one eligible for the mita, and the church also levied taxes. On top of these, the originarios were also the primary producers for the caciques, whom also collected their share of taxes as well (Klein 2013, 47-48). Spalding characterizes the economic situation as an “economy of plunder” relying on the exploitation of the many by the few (Spalding 1984, 138), its highpoint being the mita.
The mita also caused a steady demographic collapse of the indigenous communities, as the on the one hand the Indians did everything possible to escape the mita and tributary obligations (Benson 2012, 14), especially because working circumstances in the mines kept deteriorating year after year (Cole 1985, 26). As the ore depleted, the mine had to be run deeper and extraction became more demanding while the ore itself yielded less. Hence, mining became more dangerous over the years. It is suspected that, combined with the spreading of European diseases, 75 percent of the indigenous population perished in the first 40 years of the conquest (Spalding 1984). On top of these negative trends, taxes were not reduced, adding to the economic burden of the originarios (Klein 2013, 48). At the beginning of the Toledo reforms, Toledo counted a bit over a million indigenous peasants. By the end of the seventeenth century, the system oppressed just half that number with the same taxes.
One the other hand, these developments set a negative spiral in motion resulting in massive abandonment of the indigenous communities and the originarios status, seeking to different ways to escape their tributary and labour obligations, creating a large floating Indian peasant population. Many originarios escaped from their native villages and became
forasteros; members of the floating migrant labour force who had forfeited their rights to land
32 and attached themselves to local landowners or other forms of service in the city, in effect becoming indentured servants who in exchange for labour on the estates obtained usufruct land use rights and protection from their obligation to the Spanish Crown (Benson 2012, 15, Albó 2008, 16, Klein 2013, 50, Wightman 1990, 18).
Cole notes that the indigenous respond to the reforms was to use every means possible to evade the mita (1985, 26). In 1580 B. Ramirez declared that out of every 10 Indians coming to Potosí, only six return home (Saignes 1995, 183). Finegan even indicates that such a large part of the Indian community gave up their status as originario, that by the end of the colonial period the forasteros and yanacones well outnumbered the originarios (1999, 145). This statement is confirmed by Saignes, indicating that at the end of the seventeenth century, half of the tribute paying population constituted of forasteros. Benson points out that up to 1630 there was a constant decline in tributarios and mitayos (2012, 14). Zulawski (1990), Cook (1981, 229), and Tandeter (1993), while researching the demographic trends in the mita region in colonial Bolivia; also observed a significant decline of the overall number of
mitayos. Tandeter reports that in the area subject to the mita, a census showed that the
population had declined by 45 percent since the first Toledo inspection (1993, 30).
A third consequence of the Toledo reforms related directly to the structure of land ownership of the Bolivian lands. Because so many Indians gave up their originario status due to the obligations attached to it, whereby in doing so they gave up their land and their right to it. Large areas of these traditional lands were hence suddenly freed up in the second half of the sixteenth century. Combined with the declining value of the encomienda, wealthy Spaniards found an alternative source of income in direct agricultural production through appropriation of these lands (Klein 2013, 49). The large agricultural ranch was born, the
hacienda or latifundio and hence the first period of hacienda expansion was a fact. These
same demographic and economic pressures thus created a new class of wealthy Spaniards: the so-called hacendados, the large landowners (Klein 2013, 48). While researching the persistence of the long-term effects of the mining mita, Melissa Dell (2010) found that indeed the landed elite did not yet exist before the enactment of the mita.
