¹ Among recent works, Charles Bergquist has taken seriously the export orientation of Latin American economies and its effects on labour formation. See his Labour in Latin America: Comparative Essays on Chile, Argentina, Venezuela, and Colombia (Stanford, 1986). For a critique of Western-based models of labour formation, see Chakrabarty, Dipesh, Rethinking Working-Class History: Bengal 1890–1940 (Princeton, 1989)Google Scholar.

² For colonial mining labour demands, see Bakewell, Peter J., Miners of the Red Mountain: fodian Labour in Potosf, 1545–1650 (Albuquerque, 1984)Google Scholar; Cole, Jeffrey A., The Potosf Mita, 1573–1700: Compulsory Indian Labour in the Andes (Stanford, 1985)Google Scholar; Tandeter, Enrique, Coercion and Market: Silver Mining in Colonial Potosf, 1692–1826, trans. Warren, Richard (Albuquerque, 1993)Google Scholar; andZulawski, Ann, They Eat From Their Labour: Work and Social Change in Colonial Bolivia (Pittsburgh, 1995)Google Scholar.

³ Mitre, Antonio, Los patriarcas de la plata: Estructura socioeconòmica de la minerta boliviano en el siglo XIX (Lima, 1981), pp. 141–142Google Scholar.

⁴ For one of the latest additions to this vast literature, see for example Bulmer-Thomas, Victor, The Economic History of Latin America Since Independence (Cambridge, 1994)Google Scholar.

⁵ The idea that the abolition of Indian communities, what one scholar has called the “First Agrarian Reform”, was part of a liberal-inspired plan to foster development of the fining export sector and was first developed by Platt, Tristan in Estado boliviano y ayllu andino: Tierra y tributo en el Norte de Potosf (Lima, 1982)Google Scholar. Its extension to frontier lands is discussed in Langer, Erick D., Economic Change and Rural Resistance in Southern Bolivia. 1880–1930 (Stanford, 1989), pp. 21–22Google Scholar.

⁶ For an overview of this modernization, see Mitre, Los patriarcas, pp. 90–108, 112–137; also Ostria, Gustavo Rodriguez, El socavon y el sindicato: Ensayos hist⊙ricos sobre los trabajadores mineros sighs XIX-XX (La Paz, 1991), pp. 36Google Scholar. The Franckes' specific contributions are discussed in Morales, Ramiro Condarco, Aniceto Arce: Artifice de la extensiòn de la revolutiòn industrial en Bolivia (La Paz, 1985), pp. 265–268Google Scholar.

⁷ For Chile, see Vergara, Gabriel Salazar, Labradores, peones y proletarios: Formaciòn y crisis de la sotiedad popular chilena del siglo XIX, 2nd ed. (Santiago, 1989), pp. 156–172Google Scholar; for Tucumàn see Santamarìa, Daniel J., Azùcar y sotiedad en el Noroeste argentino (Buenos Aires, 1986), pp. 9–22Google Scholar; for Mexico, see for example Wasserman, Mark, Capitalists, Caciques, and Revolution: The Native Elite and Foreign Enterprise in Chihuahua, Mexico, 1854–1911 (Chapel Hill, 1984), pp. 71–94Google Scholar.

⁸ Mitre, Los patriarcas. For the Potosf mining boomlet, see Platt, Tristan, “Producciòn, tecnologìa y trabajo en la Rivera de Potosì durante la repùblica temprana”, Paper presented at the Encuentro Internacional de Historia “El siglo XIX, Bolivia y Amèrica Latina”, Sucre, 25–29 07 1994Google Scholar.

⁹ Ernesto Rück, “Bolivia: Su producciòn actual de plata en 1882, segun càlculo del suscrito”, Colecciòn Rück 541, p. 4, Archivo Nadonal de Bolivia [hereinafter ANB].

¹⁰ Mitre, Los patriarcas. Condarco Morales's study, Aniceto Arce, does likewise.

¹¹ Mallon, Florencia, The Defense of Community in Peru's Central Highlands: Peasant Struggle and Capitalist Transition, 1860–1940 (Princeton, 1983)Google Scholar; Roseberry, William, Gudmundson, Lowell and Kutschbach, Mario Samper (eds), Coffee, Society, and Power in Latin America (Baltimore, 1995)Google Scholar.

¹² Katz, Friedrich, “Labour Conditions on Haciendas in Porfirian Mexico: Some Trends and Tendencies”, Hispanic American Historical Review, 54:1 (1974), pp. 1–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹³ As far as I know, there is no serious study of mining in northern Bolivia (in the La Paz district) for the nineteenth century except for Ostria, Gustavo Rodriguez, “Vida, trabajo y luchas sociales de los mineros de la serranfa Corocoro-Chacarilla”, Historia y Cultura, 9 (1986), pp. 151–167Google Scholar. This region might provide a different model of labour access about which we have no knowledge at present.

¹⁴ Mitre, Los patriarcas.

¹⁵ Only Ramîro Condarco Morales, in his voluminous study of the silver oligarch and Bolivian president Aniceto Arce, notes this type of mixed agricultural-mining enterprise, but docs not follow up on the implications for the operation of the mines located within the agricultural estate. See his Aniceto Arce, pp. 597–598. Curiously, Condarco discusses the “ecosymbiosis” of Arce's haciendas, but fails to take into account Arce's southern mining possessions. Instead, like Mitre, he concentrates on the Huanchaca Company, an atypical mining enterprise as noted above.

¹⁶ Lora, Guillermo, A History of the Bolivian Labour Movement, 1848–1971, trans. Whitehead, Christine (Cambridge, 1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Thompson, E.P., The Making of the English Working Class (London, 1966)Google Scholar; Hobsbawm, Eric and Rudè, George, Captain Swing: A Social History of the Great English Agricultural Uprising of 1830 (New York, 1975)Google Scholar; Rodrìguez Ostria, El socavon.

¹⁷ Platt, Tristan, “Condenda andina y conrienda proletariat Qhuyaruna y ayllu en el Norte de Potosf” HISLA: Revista latinoamericana de historia econòmica y social, 2 (1983), pp. 47–73Google Scholar. Platt argues that the tlo represents old Andean deities rather than what Taussig, Michael T., in The Devil and Commodity Fetishism in South America (Chapel Hill, 1979)Google Scholar, described as a representation of the devil, which for the workers meant a symbol of their own capitalist exploitation. See also Nash, June, We Eat the Mines and the Mines Eat Us: Dependency and Exploitation in the Bolivian Tin Mines (New York, 1979)Google Scholar.

¹⁸ Chakrabarty, Dipesh, “Postcoloniality and the Artifice of History: Who Speaks for Indian Pasts?”, Representations, 37 (1992), pp. 1–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁹ There is a vast literature on this topic for rural estates in Latin America. See for example Mörner, Magnus, “The Spanish-American Hacienda: A Survey of Recent Research and Debate”, Hispanic American Historical Review, 53:2 (1973), pp. 183–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Young, Eric Van, “Mexican Rural History since Chevalier: The Historiography of the Colonial Hacienda”, Latin American Research Review, 18:3 (1983), pp. 5–61Google Scholar. For obrajes, the textile mills, see for example Galindo, Alberto Flores, Arequipa y el sur andino, sighs XVUI–XX (Lima, 1997), pp. 36–4Google Scholar.

²⁰ Mitre, Los patriarcas; also see Contreras, Manuel, Tecnologta moderna en las Andes: Minertae ingenieriè en el siglo XX (La Paz, 1994)Google Scholar and Galindo, Alberto Flores, Los mineros de la Cerro de Pasco, 1900–1930 (Lima, 1974)Google Scholar.

²¹ See especially Mitre, Los patriarcas and Condarco, Aniceto Arce.

²² See Langer, Economic Change, pp. 25–29.

²³ van Brabant, William, La Bolivie (Paris, 1908), pp. 272Google Scholar.

²⁴ Platt, Tristan, “Calendarios tributaries e intervenciòn mercantil. La articulaciòn estacional de los ayllus de Lìpez con el mercado minero potosino (siglo XIX)”, in Harris, Olivia, Larson, Brooke and Tandeter, Enrique (eds), La participaciòn indfgena en los mercados surandinos: Estrategias y reproducciòn social. Siglos XVI a XX, (La Paz, 1987) pp. 502–516Google Scholar.

²⁵ de Bolivia, Compañia Guadalupe, Memoria presentada a la Junta General de Accionistas (Sucre, 1889), pp. 12, 10, Be 162, XIIIGoogle Scholar, Biblioteca Nacional de Bolivia [hereinafter BNB]. For the argument that carts diminished the dependence on llama drivers, see Ostria, Gustavo Rodrìguez, “Los mineros: Su proceso de formaciòn (1825–1927)”, Historia y Cultura, 15 (1989), p. 89Google Scholar and Rodrìguez Ostria, El socavdn, p. 36.

²⁶ For the needs of Colquechaca Company, consult Lucio Leiton to Jacobo Aillon, Potosf, 15 January 1890, “Copiador Cartas Abel Vacaflores 1889. Libra No. 2”, Fondo Vacaflores, Archivo de la Sociedad Agricola, Ganadera 6 Industrial de Cinti (La Paz) [hereinafter FV]. I have estimated that a llama can carry one quintal, or about 100 pounds. For competition over pack animals, see Leiton to Justino H. Balderrama, Potosf, 21 January 1890; Leiton to Guillermo Leiton, Potosf, 25 February 1890; Leiton to Balderrama, 25 February 1890, ibid. The use of llamas and mules and the cost of the latter is documented in Leiton to Nèstor Villa, 29 January 1890; Leiton to Sr Prsdte de la Ca Aullagas, 1 February 1890; and Leiton to G. Leiton, 18 March 1890, all ibid.

²⁷ Compañfa Guadalupe de Bolivia, Memoria (1889), pp. 12–13. Gabriel Salazar makes a similar point for Chilean mining operations. See his Labradores, pp. 214–216.

²⁸ All studies thus far for the nineteenth century are almost exclusively based on the mining companies' annual reports. There are several problems with this type of source. First of all, the annual reports, printed in neat folios and often with extensive ornamentation, privilege those companies that were wealthiest and most highly capitalized. Reports come into existence usually only when significant progress had already been made and the company produced some kind of ore. Secondly, the company reports, which were not only reports to stockholders but also pieces of propaganda to lure new investors, as in stock reports today, tended to emphasize the high technology employed and the successes. Only with the weekly reports written by the mine administrators to company headquarters is it possible to get a real sense of how these companies worked.

²⁹ For a revealing look at issues facing a mining company in the exploration phase, see “Cartas Copiadores, Cìa Colquechaca, Sep. 30, 1907 a Nov. 1913”. For example, in September 1912 the company paid 865 Bs to contractors and only 266.90 Bs for wages. Only 9 Bs were used for materials, out of a total of 1147.80 Bs total expenditures. See ff. 546–547. For the Andacaba Company, see Libro No. 3, f. 87, Fondo Aniceto Arce, ANB [hereinafter FAA]. For an excellent treatment of nineteenth-century kajchas, see Ostria, Gustavo Rodriguez, “Kajchas, trapicheros y ladrones de mineral”, Sigh XIX: Revista de Historia 8 (1989), pp. 125–139Google Scholar.

³⁰ See Libro No. 3, ff. 227, 261, 371, FAA. For definitions of the various occupations, see Langue, Frèdrique and Salazar-Soler, Carmen, Diccionario de tèrminos mineros para la Amèrica española (sighs XVI–XIX) (Paris, 1993)Google Scholar.

³¹ Libro No. 3, ff. 192, 196, FAA.

³² Compañfa Guadalupe de Bolivia, Memoria (1889), p. 11; Memoria presentada à la Junta General de Accionistas (Sucre, 1896), p. 45, Bd 253, BNB.

³³ Mitre, Los patriarcas, p. 154. With such a divergence in figures, it is likely that Mitre's calculations factor in additional costs which the other records do not reveal, but still the difference must have been significant.

³⁴ Salazar, Labradores, pp. 216–219.

³⁵ Zulawski, They Eat from the Mines.

³⁶ Rodrìguez Ostria, “Kajchas, trapicheros”; also see Mitre, Los patriarcas, pp. 138–145.

³⁷ Ibid., p. 145; Rodriguez Ostria, “Kajchas, trapicheros”; idem, El socavon, pp. 47–49.

³⁸ Libra No. 3, ff. 9, 459, FAA.

³⁹ Dean, Warren, The Industrialization of Säo Paulo, 1880–1945 (Austin, 1969)Google Scholar.

⁴⁰ Compañfa Guadalupe de Bolivia, Memoria (1889). Guadalupe was the third largest silver mining company in the country in the late nineteenth century. See Rück, “Bolivia”, Colecciòn Rück 541, p. 4, BNB. For descriptions of the Guadalupe estates, see de Bolivia, Compañfa Guadalupe, Esladistica general de las propiedades de la Compañla Guadalpue de Bolivia (Sucre, 1892), Bd 338, XI, BNBGoogle Scholar; and Schurz, William L., Bolivia: A Commercial and Industrial Handbook (Washington, DC, 1921), p. 131Google Scholar.

⁴¹ Arce's purchase of Oploca is documented in Condarco, Aniceto Arce, pp. 597–598. By 1889, Gregorio Pacheco was the majority stockholder, with 2,000 out of 3,000 shares, whereas Arce had no stock at all in the company. See de Bolivia, Compañfa Guadalupe, Memoria (1889), p. 2Google Scholar. References to the use of peons from Hacienda La Lava first appear in Eduardo Valtalba to Josè Ma. Goitia, 19 July 1889, Libra No. 3, f. 283, FAA.

⁴² de Bolivia, Compañfa Guadalupe, Memoria (1889), pp. 10, 13, 14Google Scholar.

⁴³ For a discussion of the hacienda labour system in nineteenth-century Bolivia, see Langer, Economic Change, pp. 54–61.

⁴⁴ Pacheco, Gregorio, Compañfa Guadalupe de Bolivia: Informe que el Delegado del Directorio de dicha compañfa presenta d la Junta General de Accionistas (Sucre, 1889), P. 7, Be 156, VII, BNBGoogle Scholar. For Andacaba, see Libro No. 3, ff. 283–434, FAA. Unfortunately, we do not know the percentage of hacienda peons who worked in Guadalupe's mines and refining establishments. The Andacaba Company records, where the relationship between hacienda and mine was more recent, suggest that the proportion of workers was significant, but did not represent the majority. During the period from 16 March to 27 APril 1890, the only time-span for which we have this type of documentation, an average of 31 out of 97 workers in the Andacaba mines were hacienda peons from La Lava, or about a third of all workers. It is likely that this was a lower percentage than in Guadalupe, where the relationship between the mines and the landed estates was much more ancient.

⁴⁵ Pacheco, Compañfa Guadalupe de Bolivia, p. 7.

⁴⁶ Compañfa Guadalupe de Bolivia, Memoria (1889), pp. 7, 8, 10; Memoria de 1896, pp. 11, 35. 36.

⁴⁷ Lofstrom, William, Dàmaso de Uriburu (La Paz, 1982), 36–37Google Scholar.

⁴⁸ Libra No. 3, ff. 374–375v, 385–386v, 397v–398, 407–408v, 413–414v, 424–425v, 433–434. FAA.

⁴⁹ Compañfa Guadalupe de Bolivia, Memoria (1889), p. 14; Pacheco, Comparña Guadalupe de Bolivia, p. 8.

⁵⁰ Libro No. 3, Emilio Bcnavidez to Josè Ma Goitia, Andacaba, 19 July 1889, f. 283, FAA.

⁵¹ See for example Libro No. 3, Indalecio López to Benavidez, Andacaba, 19 and 22 February, and 2 March 1890, ff. 330, 333, 354, FAA.

⁵² Libro No. 3, Lòpez to Benavides, Andacaba, 2 March 1890, f. 354; Lòpez to Mauricio Pidot, Andacaba, 21 March 1890, f. 379, FAA.

⁵³ Compañfa Guadalupe de Bolivia, Memoria de 1896, p. 14.

⁵⁴ For a discussion of labour relations in southern Bolivian haciendas, see Langer, Erick D., “Labour Strikes and Reciprocity on Chuquisaca Haciendas”, Hispanic American Historical Review, 65:2 (1985). pp.255–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵⁵ Libra No. 3, Lòpez to Benavides. Andacaba, 2 March 1890, f. 354, FAA.

⁵⁶ For nineteenth-century Peru, see Contreras, Carlos, Mineros y campesinos en losAndes: Mercado laboural y economla campesina en la Sierra Central siglo XIX (Lima, 1987)Google Scholar. For an intriguing study of this problem for Cerro de Pasco, see Dore, Elizabeth, “Social Relations and the Barriers to Economic Growth: The Case of the Peruvian Mining Industry”, Nova Americana, 1 (1978), pp. 245–267Google Scholar.

⁵⁷ Lofstrom, Dàmaso de Uriburu; Pacheco quote in Rodriguez Ostria, El socavon, p. 31. For the 1840s, see Dalence, Josè Maria, Bosquejo estadìstico de Bolivia (La Paz, 1975 [1848]), pp. 259–260Google Scholar.

⁵⁸ Rodrìguez Ostria, El socavon, pp. 27–29. For Andacaba, see Libro No. 3, Lòpez to Benavidez, Andacaba, 6 February 1890, f. 313; Lòpez to Jerardo Azurduy, 7 February 1890, f. 315; Lòpez to Benavidez, 8 February 1890, f. 318; Lopez to Benavidez, 9 February 1890, f. 321, FAA. For All Saint's Day, see Zacarias Ponce to German Zelada, Colquechaca, 26 October 1907, f. 10, “Cartas Copiadores Cfa Colquechaca, Sep. 30, 1907 a Nov. 1913”, Archivo Gimènez (Sucre) [hereinafter AG].

⁵⁹ Platt, “Calendarios tributarios”.

⁶⁰ Lucio Leiton t o Guillerrao Leiton, Potosf, 18 March 1890, “Cdpiador de Cartas Abel Vacaflores 1889: Libra No. 2”;, pp. 491–492, FV.

⁶¹ See the company's various Informes, stretching from 1860 to 1877, preserved in MSS Ruck, Minas, Cfa Bolfvar, Potosf 1820–1840, BNB.

⁶² Pacheco, Compañfa Guadalupe de Bolivia, p. 7.

⁶³ Ibid., p. 10. Emphasis in the original.

⁶⁴ Compañfa Guadalupe de Bolivia, Memoria de 1896, pp. 14, 12.

⁶⁵ Schurz, Bolivia, pp. 130–131.

⁶⁶ See for example Ostria, Rodrfguez, El socavon, the best recent mine labour history, which jumps from the late nineteenth century to 1918Google Scholar. Likewise, Mitre, Antonio, Bajo un cielo de estano: Fulgor y. ocaso del metal en Bolivia (La Paz, 1993)Google Scholar largely skips over this period. The only important contribution is C., Manuel E. Contreras, “Mano de obra en la minerfa estanffera de principios de siglo, 1900–1925”, Historia y Cultura, 8 (1985), PP. 97–134Google Scholar.

⁶⁷ I am extremely grateful to Pilar Giménez Domfnguez, who made these records available to me. For an overview of the Sucre elite's attempts to get into the tin mining industry, see Langer, Economic Change, pp. 46–47. Most studies on Bolivian mine labour have focused on northern Potosí. For a representative sample, seeHarris, Olivia and Albó, Javier, Monteras y guardatojos: Campesinos y mineros en el none de Potosf, rev. ed. (La Paz, 1986)Google Scholar; Nash, We Eat the Mines', Platt, “Conciencia andina”; Godoy, Mining and Agriculture.

⁶⁸ The records indicate that independent contractors composed the vast majority of the labour force, especially in the rubrics of exploration and shaft digging, the most labour-intensive activities. Unfortunately, the letters only record relations with the general con-tractors rather than with the individual labourers, making it impossible to determine the composition of the contractors' workforce. For kajchas1, see Ponce to Zelada, 29 February 1907, f. 59; 2 May 1908, f. 87, “Cartas Copiadores Cfa Colquechaca, Sep. 30, 1907 a Nov. 1913”, AG.

⁶⁹ Ponce to Zelada, 26 October 1907, f. 10, “Cartas”, AG.

⁷⁰ Ponce to Zelada, 21 March 1908. f. 73; 11 April 1908, f. 80; 20 June 1908, f. 114; 12 September 1908, f. 140, “Cartas”, AG.

⁷¹ Francisco Leaño to Directorio, n/d, f. 2, “Letters”, AC.

⁷² Leaño to Zelada, Colquechaca, 4 April 1918, f. 41; 25 April 1918, f. 71; 16 May 1918, f. 103, “Letters”; Ponce to Zelada, Colquechaca, 12 August 1912, “Cartas”; Leaño to Zelada, La Gallofa, 8 August 1918, f. 231; Armando Seoane and Leafio to Zelada, La Gallofa, 31 October 1918, f. 344, “Letters”, AG.

⁷³ Ponce to Zelada, Colquechaca, 25 April 1908, f. 85; 13 June 1908, f. 112, “Cartas”, AG.

⁷⁴ Leaño to Zelada, Colquechaca, 21 April 1913, f. 696; 5 May 1913, f. 711; 2 June 1913, “Cartas”, AG.

⁷⁵ Leaño to Zelada, Colquechaca, 18 April 1918, f. 61, “Letters”, AG.

⁷⁶ Leaño to Zelada, Colquechaca, 11 April 1918, f. 54, “Letters”, AG. Also see Contreras, “Mano de obra”.

⁷⁷ Leaño to Zelada, Colquechaca, 4 July 1918, f. 185, “Letters”, AG. For patterns in the 1840s, see Platt, “Calendarios tributarios”.

⁷⁸ Seoane to Zelada, La Gallofa Colquechaca, 26 September 1918, ff. 298–299; Leaño to Zelada, La Gallofa, October 17 1918, f. 321, “Letters”, AG.

⁷⁹ For a detailed discussion of the transportation problem, see Mitre, Bajo un cielo, PP. 72–102.

⁸⁰ Ibid., pp. 202–213.

⁸¹ Nash, We Eat the Miner, Taussig, The Devil.

⁸² Tejerina, Francisco Salazar, Leyendas y tradiciones de Tupiza 2nd ed. (La Paz, 1981), p. 12Google Scholar.