Last updated 09/07/24: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 December 2015
A watershed in Peru's development, and perhaps its most traumatic experience as an independent republic, was its humiliating defeat at the hands of Chile during the War of the Pacific (1879-1883). The impact of the war was profound. Virtually every aspect of Peruvian political, economic, and social life was affected. The army was defeated, the country invaded, and Lima occupied. By the peace treaty, Peru's nitrate-bearing southern provinces were handed over to Chile, depriving it of its most important source of income. The economy of the country was further undermined by the war-time destruction of many coastal sugar and cotton plantations. Economic collapse was accompanied by political chaos. Fighting continued after the end of the war as forces loyal to General Andrés A. Cáceres, who had carried out an effective guerrilla campaign against the Chileans in the sierra, now aimed their guns at the Chilean-imposed government of General Miguel Iglesias. In December 1885 they captured Lima, paving the way for Cáceres' election as president.
1 Research for this paper was funded in part by the Central Research Fund of the University of London and the Canada Council.
2 For the situation during the war and immediately after see Bonilla, Heraclio, “The War of the Pacific and the national and colonial problem in Peru,” Past & Present (Nov. 1978), No. 81, pp. 92–118 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Basadre, Jorge, Historia de la República del Perú 1822–1933.: Sexta Edición Aumentada y Corregida, 16 vols. Lima, (1968), VIII and IX.Google Scholar
3 El Comercio (Lima), May 24, 1884. Even commentators who were sympathetic to the Indians tended to see them as “submissive” or helpless. See Mayer, Dora, The Conduct of the Cerro de Pasco Mining Company (Lima, 1913), p. 40 Google Scholar; José Carlos Mariátegui, Siete Ensayos de Interpretación de la Realidad Peruana (various editions).
4 See for example Fisher, John R., Government and Society in Colonial Peru, 1784–1814 (London, 1970), pp. 14–16.Google Scholar
5 For a resumé of the major trends of this early period see Davies, Thomas M. Jr., Indian Integration in Peru. A Half Century of Experience, 1900–1948 (Lincoln, 1970), ch. 2.Google Scholar
6 For a recent survey of the literature on this particular rebellion, as well as an indication of the problems which beset the Indian population both then and subsequently see Campbell, Leon, “Recent research on Andean peasant revolts, 1750–1820,” Latin American Research Review (1979), 14, No. 1.Google Scholar
7 For the case of the Mantaro Valley in the 1870s see Samaniego, Carlos, “Peasant movements at the turn of the century and the rise of the independent farmer” in Long, Norman & Roberts, Bryan R. (eds.), Peasant Cooperation and Capitalist Expansion in Central Peru (Austin, 1978), pp. 50–52.Google Scholar
8 Davies, , Indian Integration in Peru, p. 34.Google Scholar
9 United States, Department of State, Foreign Relations of the United States 1883 (Washington, 1884), pp. 726–727.
10 United States, Department of State, Foreign Relations of the United States 1885 (Washington, 1886), p. 627. For the wartime uprisings see Bonilla, , “The national and colonial problem in Peru,” pp. 113–115 Google Scholar; Smith, Gavin A., “Socio-economic differentiation and relations of production among rural-based petty producers in central Peru, 1880 to 1870,” The Journal of Peasant Studies (1979), VI, No. 3, p. 290 Google Scholar; Smith, Gavin A. & Pedro, Cano H., “Some factors contributing to peasant land occupations in Peru: the example of Huasicancha, 1963–1968” in Long, & Roberts, (eds.), Peasant Cooperation and Capitalist Expansion, p. 166 Google Scholar. For Cáceres’ ties with the Indians see Parker, W.B., Peruvians of To-day (Lima, 1919), p. 182 Google Scholar; El Comercio, Feb. 4, 1885; Amazonas, May 19, 1884, D10661; Ancash, Mar. 29, 1885, D4270. (The documentary material for this paper comes from a little-used source, the reports of various government officials from the sierra departments that are presently stored in the Sala de Investigaciones of the Biblioteca Nacional in Lima. The reports were written by the prefects of the departments, the subprefects of provinces, the governors of towns, and visiting officials on assignment in the area. For the sake of brevity in the footnotes I have reduced the title of the documents to the geographical region, the date, and the catalogue number in the Sala de Investigaciones.)
11 Huánuco, Jan. 10, 1886, D3852.
12 Junín, Sept. 1886, DI 1941; Huancayo, May 1889, D12845; Huancayo, 1896, D5041; El Comercio, Oct. 20, 1887, Jan. 4, 1889.
13 Details of the exploitation can be found in Puno, May 30,1888, D4569; Junín, June 23, 1888, D3978; Cuzco, July 13, 1888, D3975; Apurimac, May 31, 1892, D4581.
14 El Comercio, June 22, 1885.
15 For these and other details of the revolt see Klaiber, Jeffrey L., Religion and Revolution in Peru, 1824–1976 (Notre Dame, 1977), pp. 58–70 Google Scholar; Alvarez-Brun, Félix, Ancash: Una historia regional peruana (Lima, 1970), pp. 199–208 Google Scholar; Basadre, , Historia de la República del Perú, 9, p. 35 Google Scholar; Alayza, Luis y Soldán, Paz, Mi País. En Las Breñas del Perú (Lima, 1944), pp. 302–304 Google Scholar; El Comercio, June 5, 22, July 3, Aug. 13, Oct. 9, 1885, July 9, Nov. 29, 1886.
l6 Huancavelica, Nov. 9, 1886, D7167; Chancay, 1887, D7350; El Comercio, Aug. 25, 2nd ed., 1896.
l7 Junín, June 23, 1888, D3978; Cerro de Pasco, Sept. 1888, D11447; El Comercio, Aug. 21, 1889, Dec. 7, 1st ed., 1893.
l8 Klaiber, , Religion and Revolution, pp. 51 Google Scholar, 57; Davies, , Indian Integration in Peru, p. 36 Google Scholar; El Comercio, Apr. 23, 2nd ed., May 15,2nd ed., 1896, Apr. 23,2nd ed., May 1,2nd ed., 1897; Chucuito, May 23, 1898, D4557.
19 Chucuito, Jan. 1902, E217; El Comercio, Jan. 18, 2nd ed., 1904; Huaylas, Apr. 1906, E662.
20 Huánuco, Mar. 29, 1885, D4020.
21 Huaraz, Mar. 24, 1887, D8075.
22 El Comercio, July 28, Nov. 19, 1887; Amazonas, July 13, 1889, D11394.
23 Puno, June 8, 1887, D4558; Ica, Dec. 1887, D5389; Ayacucho, June 25, 1888, D10843; Huancabamba, Aug. 1888, D6824; Director de Gobierno, June 5, 1891, D4521 ; Huancavelica, June 15, 1892, D4507; Apurimac, Nov. 30, 1895, D4580.
24 El Comercio, Mar. 31, 2nd ed., 1896; Cuzco, Oct. 8, 1896, D8655; Puno, Oct. 1896, D7811.
25 Klaiber, , Religion and Revolution, pp. 56–57 Google Scholar; Alayza, y Soldán, Paz, Mi País, p. 104 Google Scholar; Piel, Jean, “The place of the peasantry in the national life of Peru in the nineteenth century,” Past & Present (Feb. 1970), No. 46, pp. 129–130.Google Scholar
26 Cuzco, July 25, 1902, E172.
27 Ayacucho, July 21, 1890, D5564; La Opinion Nacional (Lima), Feb. 4, 14, 1890.
28 Azángaro, May 31, 1899, D4559; Puno, June 15, 1900, E836.
29 El Comercio, Oct. 2, Nov. 28, 2nd ed., 1891.
30 Ibid., Feb. 19, 1887; Klaiber, , Religion and Revolution, p. 57.Google Scholar
31 Klaiber, , Religion and Revolution, pp. 54–55 Google Scholar; Chucuito, Jan. 1902, E217.
32 For the Mantaro Valley, see Smith, , “Socio-economic differentiation,” p. 289 Google Scholar. For the southern region, see Thorp, Rosemary & Bertram, Geoffrey, Peru 1890–1977. Growth and Policy in an Open Economy (London, 1978), pp. 64–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33 Puno, June 8, 1887, D4558; El Comercio. Dec. 18, 1st ed., 1891.
34 For example, see Laite, Julian, “Processes of industrial and social change in highland Peru” in Long, & Roberts, (eds.), Peasant Cooperation and Capitalist Expansion.Google Scholar
35 For enganche, see Blanchard, Peter, “The recruitment of workers in the Peruvian sierra at the turn of the century: the enganche system,” Inter-American Economic Affairs (1979), XXXIII, No. 3.Google Scholar
36 Piel, , “The place of the peasantry,” p. 130.Google Scholar
You have
Access
