Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T13:50:30.877Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mission Land Tenure on the Southeastern Bolivian Frontier, 1845-1949*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 December 2015

Erick D. Langer
Erick D. Langer*
Affiliation:
Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The land tenure arrangements of missions in Latin America have received insufficient attention. Given the vast extent of land the missions controlled on the Latin American frontier and the effect that land tenure arrangements had on the functioning of the missions, this is a serious oversight. Rather than focus on land tenure, most studies of the missions have examined primarily issues such as evangelization, the labor regime, and demographic patterns. While these topics are also important, indeed vital, to an understanding of missions, an analysis of land tenure arrangements is a useful way for understanding the economic and even the political dimensions of mission systems. For example, the control that the missionaries imposed on their charges should have been reflected in a majority of the land controlled directly by the missionaries rather than holdings controlled by individual Indian families. In this sense, the land tenure system reflected the missionary regime in important ways and helps test hypotheses about economic resources as well as power within this controversial institution. In addition, the changes in ownership and use of land became a key ingredient in determining the survival of indigenous groups once the government secularized the missions.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Americas , Volume 50 , Issue 3 , January 1994 , pp. 399 - 418
Copyright
Copyright © Academy of American Franciscan History 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This article was originally presented at the “Changing Patterns of Land Tenure in 19th and 20th Century Bolivia” panel, Rocky Mountain Council for Latin American Studies Meeting, in El Paso, TX, February 20-22, 1992. It benefited from the comments of Susan Ramírez and Robert Jackson, as well as anonymous reviewers. Research for this paper was funded by a Fulbright Faculty Research Award, American Philosophical Society Research Grant, a Carnegie Mellon University Faculty Development Grant, and an Albert J. Beveridge Grant for Research in the History of the Western Hemisphere.

References

1 For a typical example, Fr. Bernardino de Nino spent 12 pages on the description of the various buildings of Boicovo mission, dedicating half to the mission church, whereas he spent less than a page and a half to a description of the rather complex land tenure arrangements. See De Nino, , Misiones franciscanas del Colegio de Propaganda Fide de Potosí (La Paz, 1918), pp. 115–30.Google Scholar

2 For an estimate of the Chiriguano population on the Franciscan missions, see Langer, Erick D., “Franciscan Missions and Chiriguano Workers: Colonization, Acculturation and Indian Labor in Southeastern Bolivia,” The Americas, 42:1 (Jan. 1987), 308, 310.Google Scholar

3 Universidad de San Francisco Xavier de Chuquisaca, Sucre, Centro Bibliográfico Documental Histórico, Fondo Prefectural, Notaría de Hacienda y Minas 1889, p. 54 [hereafter cited as NHM].

4 Martarelli, Angélico, El Colegio Franciscano de Potosí y sus misiones (2nd ed.; La Paz, 1918 [?]), pp. 257–58.Google Scholar

5 Archivo Nacional de Bolivia, Correspondencia Oficial [hereafter cited as ANB-CO], Ml. Dorado to Ministro del Interior, Tarija, Aug. 20, 1836, p. 4, MI T. 59 No. 30.

6 Corrado, Alejandro M., El Colegio Franciscano de Tarija y sus misiones (2nd ed.; Tarija, 1990), II, p. 362.Google Scholar It must be kept in mind that, as a rule, the Bolivian government did not recognize land rights of frontier indigenous groups. Indeed, in one case the Caraparirenda Chiriguanos, who lived in the valley of the same name dispersed in six allied villages, requested (and received) a land grant to preserve their territorial integrity. As far as I know, this is the only indigenous group to do so on the southeastern Bolivian frontier. See Langer, Erick D., Economic Change and Rural Resistance in Southern Bolivia 1880–1930 (Stanford, 1989), pp. 135–36.Google Scholar

7 See Archivo del Vicariato Apostólico del Chaco, Camiri [hereafter cited as AVAChC], “Títulos del Dr. Aniceto Arce presentado por su apoderado Julio M. Trigo para su inscripción en el rejistro de Colonias;” and NHM, 1889, p. 54.

8 Jackson, Robert H., “Population and the Economic Dimension of Colonization in Alta California: Four Mission Communities,” Journal of the Southwest, 33:3 (1991), 387–439.Google Scholar

9 Archivo Franciscano de Tarija [hereafter cited as AFT], “Libro 2o Copia—Notas de la Prefectura de las Misiones Franciscanas del Colejio de Nra. Sra. de los Angeles de Tarija, que comienza el día 7 de Abril de 1883, por su Prefecto Doroteo Giannecchini,” pp. 7–14.

10 Jofré, Manuel O., hijo, Colonias y misiones: Informe de la visita practicada por el Delegado del Supremo Gobierno, Doctor Manuel O. Jofré, hijo en 1893 (Tarija, 1895), p. 23.Google Scholar

11 Ibid., p. 51.

12 Ibid., p. 23; Martarelli, , El Colegio Franciscano, p. 202.Google Scholar

13 Unfortunately, we do not have detailed census information on either San Antonio or San Francisco. However, the census data from Macharetí, where small contingents of Tapietés (another Chaco hunting-and-gathering ethnic group) and Tobas also lived, is suggestive. Of the Tapietés group, the heads of household of only 26 of 69 families were below the age of 35. In the case of the Tobas, only 3 of 18 heads of household were under that age. See Archivo Parroquial de Macharetí [hereafter cited as APM], “Padrón de la Misión de Macharetí. Censo 1 formado por el P. Columbano Ma. Puccetti 1900,” pp. 104–119.

14 Jofré, , Colonias y misiones, p. 37.Google Scholar

15 Ibid., pp. 44–45; Corrado, , El Colegio Franciscano, pp. 414–15.Google Scholar

16 Jofré, , Colonias y misiones, p. 26.Google Scholar

17 For Tiguipa, see ibid., p. 58; for Tarairí, ibid., p. 51.

18 For example, see Langer, , Economic Change, p. 160.Google Scholar The catastros, or land tax records, confirm this impression as well.

19 For Tiguipa, see Jofré, , Colonias y misiones, p. 58 Google Scholar; for Aguairenda, see ibid., p. 26. For the other missions, consult ibid., pp. 51, 67. The integration of the mission Indians into the monetary economy is discussed in Langer, , “Franciscan.Missions,” pp. 314–15.Google Scholar

20 de Nino, Bernardino, Etnografía chiriguana (La Paz, 1912), pp. 238–39.Google Scholar

21 See Langer, , Economic Change, pp. 122–56.Google Scholar

22 APM, “Libro 1° de Hacienda 1869,” p. 5.

23 See, for example, NHM, 1912, pp. 4–5; and 1913, pp. 2–3.

24 See Langer, , Economic Change, p. 231 n.38.Google Scholar

25 Corrado, , Colegio Franciscano, pp. 377–78.Google Scholar

26 AFT, “Copiador de cartas de Fr. Alejandro Ercole, 21 Dic. 1870 -9 Feb. 1874,” Tarairí, Dec. 23, 1870, n.p.

27 For Boicovo, see Archivo Parroquial de Cuevo [hereafter cited as APC], “Contra Manuel Ruiz” (1883) and “Boicovo—Manuscritos varios,” no. 5. For Santa Rosa, see AVAChC, “Misiones de Chuquisaca,” no. 3, fol. 15.

28 Much of this population loss was due to immigration to Argentina. See Langer, Erick D., “The Bolivian Chiriguano and Labor Migration to the Sugar Plantations of Northern Argentina,” paper presented at the American Historical Association Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL, December 27–30, 1991.Google Scholar

29 For Tarairí, see AVAChC, “Libro para los conchabados, ano 1901.” For the 1920s, see Gutiérrez, Julio A., Delegación del Gran Chaco (Santa Cruz, 1980), p. 28.Google Scholar

30 Langer, Erick D. and de Ruiz, Zulema Bass Werner, eds., Historia de Tarija: Corpus documental (Tarija, 1988), pp. 358–59Google Scholar; AFT, “Santas Visitas, Chimeo, Itau, 1881.”

31 APC, “Registro de marcas de neófitos y arrenderos de la Misión;” “Arrenderos.” The average size of the herd in 1922 was 31 head.

32 APC, “Contrato de Arrendamiento.”

33 APC, “Registro de marcas de neófitos y arrenderos de la Misión;” “Arrenderos.” For example, in 1922 the renters had a total of 148 sheep; by 1932 this number had dropped to 60.

34 AVAChC, Capellán to Delegado Nacional Tgrl. Ayaroa [Santa Rosa?], Jan. 5, 1943; Ministro de Agricultura to César Vigiani, La Paz, Nov. 18, 1947; Juan José Angrisani to Ministro de Agricultura, Santa Rosa, Jan. 24, 1949.

35 See, for example, the Archivo de la Sociedad de Agricultores y Ganaderos de Pequeños Proprietaries de Macharetí, where Ubaldino Cundeye played a major role in the society from 1949 to 1955. Also see Langer, , “Ubaldino Cundeye: El último cacique chiriguano de Macharetí,” Presencia Literaria (June 9, 1991), 4.Google Scholar

36 AVAhC, “Testimonio No. 39/48 (Macharetí),” fols. 4v-9v. Various interviews by the author with residents of Ivo, Macharetí, Santa Rosa, Tiquipa, and Tarairí, 1990.

37 Langer, “Franciscan Missions,”; and idem, “Las misiones franciscanas entre los Chiriguanos en la rebelión de 1892,” Siglo XIX (forthcoming).

38 AFT, “Santas Visitas,” Itau, Chimeo.