Population and Ethnicity Trends in Early 19th Century Peru

Population and Ethnicity in Early Republican Peru: Some Revisions Author(s): Paul Gootenberg Reviewed work(s): Source: Latin
American Research Review, Vol. 26, No. 3 (1991), pp. 109-157 Published by: The Latin American Studies Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2503666 . Accessed: 15/12/2012 21:09
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
The Latin American Studies Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Latin American Research Review.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded on Sat, 15 Dec 2012 21:09:30 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
POPULATION IN EARLY
AND ETHNICITY REPUBLICAN PERU: Some Revisions*
PaulGootenberg
StateUniversity NewYork, of Stony Brook
All numbers on the makeup of Peru's republican population are wrong, the one point on which historianscan agree. Peruvian governmentshad neither capacitynor thewill to mountthoroughsurveysof the theirscatteredand elusive Andean subjects. Between the late viceregal a census of 1791 (reporting population of 1,076,000)and thefirst modern of effort 1876 (yieldinga countof2,699,000)lies a century demographic of no man's land, despite partialsurveysclaimed for1812, 1836, 1850, and 1862. Unfortunately, historianscannot flyback in timeand redo thehead counts missed or mismanaged by successive governments, althoughthis miraclehas seemingly been worked for the older Incan and conquest periods.1 The best scholars can attemptat this point is to untangle the confusionsofexisting census documents and bringnew evidence to bear and weaknesses. on theirstrengths This articlewill address two problems,one quantitative, other the rifewithbroadersocial implications.First,myresearchhas unearthedan under therepublic)thatcan fillin untapped fiscalcensus of1827 (thefirst the serious gap between Peru's late-colonialpopulation and that of the guano era. These new data yielda post-independencepopulation ofabout a millionand a half,a higherfigurethan previouslythoughtand one that is can replace thespurious republican"census" of1836. This new statistic preliminary, it reveals realisticand robustdemographicgrowthrates yet duringthesetransformative years. Second, these data are also employed to reestimatethe "Indian"
*1thanktheAmericanCouncil ofLearned Societiesand theSocial Science ResearchCouncil forresearchsupport as well as Brooke Larson, RoryMiller,Noble David Cook, and the threeLARR mystery readersfortheir highlyconstructive criticism. 1. See Noble David Cook, Demographic Collapse: Indian Peru, 1520-1620 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981). This work is the model combiningdemographicand social history. two untanglingexercises,see David Browningand David Robinson,"The For of Originand Comparability PeruvianPopulation Data, 1776-1815," Bulletin theSociety of for LatinAmerican Studies25 (Nov. 1976):19-37; and RoryMiller,"The Population Problem in Nineteenth-Century Lima," manuscript, Amsterdam,1988.
109
Latin American Research Review

compositionof the Peruvian population and to analyze the paradoxical ethnicdevelopmentsofthenineteenth century. this Specifically, research revisesKubler'scrucialworkon thephenomenonofIndian persistencein republicanPeru and thethesisthatnativemajoritiesactuallyincreased in of the aftermath colonialism. It is now clear that Peru exhibited even greater social continuities and stabilities thanpreviouslysupposed. These findingsand a reviewofrecentresearchon nativecommunities suggest a new periodization and interpretation Peru's long route to modern for This part of the storyis not just preliminary speculative as but mestizaje. well.
PERUVIAN "CENSUSES," 1790-1876
By modern standards, Peru did not achieve a genuine national census until1876,a half-century after independence. Even contemporary statisticiansand officialswere wary of the population estimates of the time.Indeed, census takerslikeManual Anastasio Fuentes and Mateo Paz Soldan made a cottageindustryof writingcritiquesof all extantfigures, including theirown. Their doubts, however,should be pondered elsewhere.2The truism holds thatall population figures were low,although by what margin or consistencyit is difficult know. Most surveys were to fiscalregisters actuallyreactivated recordingIndian and "casta" tributes, with all theconcealmentand flight thatsuch techniquesnaturally evoked among Peru's fluid underclasses (the most unreliable of all were the counts launched priorto military recruitment drives). Even today,Peru's difficult social geographycan challenge surveyors,and thus it is easy to imagine the obstacles for early regimes faced with civil war, faltering and primitive bureaucracies, communications. methSurveyand statistical ods were haphazard, to say the least. In lieu of fresh data, officials customarily projectedpast census figures onto muchlaterdates. Thus itis not unusual to findvillages or provinces exhibiting remarkabledemoa graphicstability (nil change between, say,1790 and 1850), or a revivalof veritable Incan mathematicaltechniques (amazingly round numbers, such as "100,000"). It is easier to indicate the least reliable population estimates for
2. The best compendium of census data and contemporary critiquesis thatby Francisco Pini RodolfifortheCentrode Estudios de Poblaci6ny Desarrollo,"La poblaci6n del Peru a lo largo de un siglo, 1785-1884," in Informe Demogrdfico Peru, 1970 (Lima: CEPD, 1972), del 19-125; see also the introduction, "Aspectos hist6ricos,"a collectiveeffort aided by Jorge Basadre, 3-18. For examples of critics,see Mateo F. Paz Soldan, Diccionario geogrdfico estadisticodel Peru (Lima: Imp. del Estado, 1878), xx-xxv,522-27, 716-40; Mateo Paz Soldan, del Geografia Peru' (Paris: ErminDidot, 1862), 154-56, 438; Manuel Anastasio Fuentes, Estadisticageneralde Lima (Lima: Tip. Nacional, 1858), 40-43; and M. A. Fuentes, Resumen del censogeneral habitantes Peruhechoen 1876 (Lima: Imp. del Estado, 1878), 1, prologue. de del 110
POPULATION
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
republicanPeru than to confirm most accurate. Table 1 compares the the resultsof fivemajor national censuses between 1791 and 1876, arranged wherepossible accordingto their initialrepublicanpoliticalunits. The census of 1791, taken under ViceroyGil de Toboada, was an ecclesiastical survey that was updated and republished in successive official gazettes of the 1790s. Initial parish estimates yielded a total of 1,076,997Peruvians, includingsome 609,000 Indians, 244,000 mestizos, and 40,000blackslaves (thosebeing counted 136,000whites,41,000pardos, must have sensed new Bourbon taxes on the way). Because of the major flawofitsslow,two-part compilation, one recentstudydubbed thesurvey the "Censuses of approximately1785-91 and 1791-96."3 The highest figurein the series, published in the 1797 Guia del Peru', was 1,208,723. Beyond thepredictableundercountofAmazonian natives,anothermajor lacuna was omission of the densely populated southernIndian zone of Puno, attachedin 1791 to theAudiencia ofAlto Peru. By 1797 thepleasing numberof 156,000 appeared forPuno, which added to the 1791 census (along with 6,200 inhabitantsof northern Jaen)produces the population of1,239,197cited in table 1. In his "Memoria" of1797,ViceroyGil criticized census, venturthe ing a population closer to 1,300,000;Tadeo Haenke felt that1,200,000was the most realisticguess.4 A more recentcriticalstudyby Browningand Robinson scrutinizedthe database of the imperialcensuses. Althoughan originalhead count surelyoccurred,all of its addenda (especially the socalled imperialcensus of 1812) were fictitious compilationsand extrapolations,unfitforserious analysis.5Still,this 1791 effort strongviceregal by
el de y militar Virreynato Peru del del para aino 1793 3. H. Unanue,Gufa politica, eclesidstica
(Lima: Sociedad Academica de Amantes del Pais, 1793), 115, and editionsto 1797; data also
(1791-1795); and "Poblaci6n del Peru a lo largo de un siglo," 20-27 See also AlbertoArco Parr6,"Sinopsis hist6ricade los Censos en el Peru," in Peru, Direcci6n Nacional de Estay disticay Censos, Censo nacionalde poblaci6n ocupaci6n,1940 (Lima: DINEC, 1944), 1, prologue. Varioussourcescitea population of100,000forPuno in the1790s (e.g., the1797 Gufa). y I prefer more realisticfigureof 156,000 quoted by J.G. Paredes in Calendario gufade the de forasteros Lima para el aiio de 1828 (Lima: J.M. Concha, 1828), 5. A minimallydifferent population of 1,249,723(includingPuno) is cited in some works, but its originis unclear. Caste data can be foundin George Kubler,TheIndianCasteofPeru, 1795-1940: A Population and (Washington, D.C.: SmithsonianInstitution, StudyBaseduponTaxRecords CensusReports Publicationno. 14, 30-33, t. 9. 1952),Institute Social Anthropology of 4. See Memoriasde los virreyes hangobernado Peru,compiledby Manuel A. Fuentes el que del (Lima: F. Bailly,1859),4:76; and Tadeo Haenke, Descripci6n Peru(Lima: El Lucero, 1901), to 90. The latter has also been attributed InspectorGeneral Escobedo. figure of 5. Browningand Robinson, "Origin and Comparability Peruvian Data." This detailed critiqueof the 1791 census calls foran improvedaggregatebased on archivalresearch,althoughmost of the difficulties (apart fromthe datingof some surveysto the 1780s) lie with laterupdates, such as the so-called census of 1812. An even more minute(but inconclusive) which is analyzed in archivalcritiqueis the 1965 Cologne dissertationof Gunter Vollmer, Nicolas Sanchez-Albornoz, The Populationof Latin America:A History(Berkeleyand Los of Angeles: University CaliforniaPress, 1974), 109-10.. ill
Publicas Peruano Historia, de LiteraturaNoticias y published various in issues ofMercurio
LatinAmerican Research Review TABL E 1 Peruvian Census Dataof1791, 1836, 1850, 1862, 1876 and 1876 (Departments 1862 Only)
Province Lima Lima(Cercado) Callao Chancay Canta CaAete Huarochiri Yauyos Santa Ica
1791 62,910 13,945 12,133 12,616 14,024 9,574 3,334 20,576
1836
1850
58,326 85,116 105,567 6,790? 8,352 17,539 18,712 13,932 13,892 16,549 12,276 2,594 18,031 23,428 30,525
14,384 18,155 15,553 37,541 14,258 15,207 15,264 16,311 12,920 45,697a
-
225,800 (Lima) 34,492 (Callao)
60,225 (Ica) 320,517
Departmental totals 149,112 151,718 189,275 240,545 Junin (Ancash)b Pasco/Tarma Jauja Huanuco Huamalies Cajatambo Junin subtotals Ancash Huaylas Huari,Conchuco Conchucos Bajo Others (Santa) Ancashsubtotals 40,822 25,308 34,911 52,286 16,826 14,234 16,872 37,050 61,023 14,534 13,172 18,464 79,911 98,979a 89,796 106,567 28,189 33,199 32,027 24,799
209,759 (Junin) 40,114 78,991 (Huanuco) 29,773a
144,243 245,722 278,859 49,667 69,077 39,833 53,693 75,956a 65,034a 9,670 284,830 (Ancash)
25,091 38,638 44,llOa 42,715 5,349
121,462 155,799 244,186 573,580
Departmental totals 201,259 263,111 401,501 523,045a La Libertad (Trujillo)b Cajamarca Chota 62,196 41,993 15,438
46,122 70,683 62,597a 77,004a 147,336 (La Libertad)
112
POPULATION
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
TA B L E 1 (continued) 1876 (Departments 1862 Only) 27,696
Province Lambayeque Trujillo Huamachuco Jaen Piura

Chiclayo
1791 35,192 12,032 38,150 6,200a

-
1836 43,202 12,032 43,058 6,706

-
1850 22,682a
44,491
53,815
86,738 (Lambayeque) 7,211 32,025 212,746 (Cajamarca) 60,845a 49,486a 7,560 11,864a 25,133 36,720 74,372a 131,464a 135,615 (Piura) 582,435a 34,284 (Amazonas)
Departmentaltotals 192,061 216,244 261,553 492,535a Amazonas Chachapoyas Maynas Pataz

Loretoc
25,398 15,000 13,508a
18,426a 17,565
27,728 11,346 29,394a
17,952 14,129 27,748

-
(Loreto) Departmentaltotals Puno

Azangaro Huancane/Puno Carabaya Chucuito Lampa
-
61,905
38,906a
35,991
39,074a 54,333 56,765 22,605 75,957 76,488
83,980a 47,912 59,217a 34,068 19,449a 44,682a
96,189
259,449 (Puno)
Departmental totals Cuzco (Apurimac) Cuzco (Cercado) Quispicanchi Urubamba Paucartambo Paruro Abancay Calca y Lares Aymaraes
100-156,000d
156,000 286,148 205,328a 41,152 49,416 28,360 17,206 17,732 21,912a 14,223 18,228 27,005 19,674a 14,972a 15,403 15,926 16,104 18,452 22,985
259,449
32,082 24,337 9,250 12,973 20,236 25,259 6,199 15,281
243,032
(Cuzco)
118,525 (Apurimac)
113
LatinAmerican Review Research TABL E 1 (continued) 1876 (Departments 1862 Only) 27,667 20,248 27,674a 21,231
63,311a
Province Cotabambas Chumbivilcas Tinta (Canas) Anta

Others
1791 19,824 15,973 -
1836 -
1850 23,241 22,050 37,605a 22,980a

32,106a
34,968
Departmental totals 216,382 216,382e 346,211 310,652a

Ayacucho (Huancavelica)b
361,557a
Huamanga Lucanas Parinacochas Cangallo Huanta
25,970a 15,725 12,474 27,337 12,020 111,559 3,245 5,146 9,365 13,161 30,917
16,011
29,617 15,401 19,334a 20,176 26,358
44,898 27,807
34,722 33,165
24,618
(Ayacucho)
142,215
Andahuaylas
Ayacuchosubtotals
19,184 51,701 130,070 236,577
Huancavelica Angaraes Castrovirreyna Tayacaja

Huancavelica
17,301 17,318 14,348 27,151
22,835
26,240 18,761 40,802
(Huancavelica)
103,069
subtotals
76,118 108,638 245,284a 157,046
Departmental totals 142,476 159,608 206,188 345,215a

Arequipa (Moquegua)b
Arequipa
37,721 10,052 20,145 13,905

-
63,816 11,270 21,170 23,446 32,380 18,642
53,334
Camana' Condesuyos Caylloma Others Moquegua Arica/Tacna
12,063 12,448a 18,887 15,659a 37,944a 29,209
(Arequipa)
28,279
18,776a
33,815a
(Moquegua) (Tacna)
28,785 36,009
114
POPULATION
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
TA B L E 1 (continued) 1876 (Departments 1862 Only)

17,239 38,225 (Tarapaca) 260,065 2,699,106
Province
Tarapaca
1791
7,923
1836
-
1850
10,418
Departmental totals National totals
136,801
136,812
196,801
214,939
1,239,197 1,373,736 2,001,123 2,461,936
Sources: See textand its footnotesfor discussion. A comprehensivesecondary source is counts CEPD, "Poblaci6n del Peru a lo largo de un siglo," 19-125. See CEPD fordifferent with Puno (under the same census) of aggregatepopulation. For 1791, the authorrectified "rectified" and Jaenadditions. For 1836, see 1847 almanac count. For 1850, see the official census. For 1862,the 1863 almanac count was used. aAuthor's recalculation for boundary changes. Due to boundary uncertainties,not all columnscan be added. Departmentaltotalsand subtotalsare mostcertaindata used fornationaltotals. bLate-colonialTarma includes subsequent departmentsof Junin,Ancash, Huaylas. Latecolonial Ayacucho (or Huamanga) includes subsequent departmentsof Ayacucho and Huancavelica. Late-colonial Arequipa includes subsequent departmentsof Arequipa and is Moquegua. Late-colonialTrujillo laterLa Libertadand includeslaterPiura. demarcations. clncludesotherminorand shifting estimatesvary; partofViceroyalty Upper Peru; 156,000is 1797 total. of dLate-colonial eThe 1832 census totalwas 232,774.
was clearlysuperiorto thosethatfollowed(perhaps thereason authorities why its numbers show up farinto the republican era). And until historians produce the new archival aggregate required, this census must serve as theindispensable "colonial" baseline forstudyof the nineteenth century. The next census allegedly occurred in 1836, producing a republican total of 1,373,736 during the depression and armed strugglesof Peru's caudillo era. This time officialsrecorded no ethnic distinctions, new ideals ofa casteless society. commensurate (one supposes) withtheir According to this census, the population had inched up a mere 10.9 overthenextdecade years. Destined forrepetition percentoverforty-five of and a half,this "census" first appeared in the Guia de forasteros 1837, withoutclues as to methodologyor even actual recounts.The Guia crypand littoral provinces ticallydubbed it as "Population of the departments activateduntil 1836 and otherdata."6 Essenaccordingto the matriculas this so-called census was no more than a reading of tax registers tially,
de y J.Masfas, 1836),14-15, 5; and Eduardo Carrasco,Calendario gufadeforasteros la Republica Primaria,1846),5 and provincialsurveys. de Peruanaparael anio 1847 (Lima: Imp. Instrucci6n continuedto be published untilthe 1851 almanac. These figures
de y 6. See J.G. Paredes,Calendario gufade forasteros Lima,parael ano de 1837(Lima:
115

from"NorthernPeru" fromsometimebetween 1826 and 1836. For the departmentsof Lima, La Libertad,Junin,Huaylas, and Amazonia, the totalpopulation is listed as 669,658, a 15 percentincrease over the 1790s figures theseregions.But even forthenorth,thefigure Trujillo for for was cribbeddirectly from1791reports,and theinhabitants tropicalMaynas of had vanished altogether. thesouth-the departments Cuzco, Puno, For of Ayacucho, and Arequipa-this reportwas no census at all: starting with borrowedstraight subsequent gufas,the number668,802 was admittedly fromthe 1795 census. Skeptics mightperceive expedient politicsin the equal estimates of 669,000 for both jealous parts of the Peru-Bolivia even ignoreda published 1832 Cuzco Confederation (1836-1838).Officials census thathad raised the region'spopulation to 232,774since the 1790s. As Kubler suggests, "To call it a census is to dignify by an undeserved it title."Yethe and othersstillcite 1836figuresas fact.7 The better-documented census of 1850,whichproduced a populationof2,001,123,occurredat thestartofPeru'sguano upturnand consolidation of the Lima state. With an increase of 627,387, the population would have jumped 45.7 percentin just fourteen years,ifone takesa base year of 1836 seriously.More believable is the 60 percentexpansion since the late colony.The work of the new 1848 "Consejo Supremo de Estadistica" under BuenaventuraSeoane, thiscensus appeared in two versions. The first,which overlooked foreigners,slaves, and newer matriculas, reached 1,887,840. This total, however,was hastily "corrected"in May 1850 to its two-millionmark-by the war ministry, which was eager to bolster the militarylevy.8One wonders whethersuch purposeful zeal could have offsetthe typical downward bias of Peruvian head counts. Some historiansdate thefiscalregisters used as earlyas 1826; morelikely, officials tabulateda new numberfrom matriculasof 1845-1850.None the of the decreed provincialstatistics boards actuallymet, however,and no ethnic breakdowns were provided. Despite its obvious flaws, the 1850 estimateremainsthebest glimpseofdemographybeforethesocial impact oftheguano era. The 1862 census, which was timed for a revised electoral roll,
7. Kublertabulatesall almanac data in IndianCasteofPeru,33. For othercritiques,see "La poblaci6n del Peru a lo largo de un siglo," 30-33; but see also provincial tables(62-81) and the erroneousclaim of superiority over 1828, 53. See P. C. Flores, Guia deforasteros Departadel mento Cuzcoparael anio 1833 (Cuzco: Imp. Publica, 1834),3-4, 26-45. For an exampleof del de continued use of the 1836 census, see Javier TantaleanA., Politicaecon6mico-financiera y la formaci6n estado:sigloxix (Lima: Centrode Estudios para el Desarrolloy la Participacion, del 1983),66, 285. 8. "Censo rectificado 1850," El Peruano de (Lima), 25 April,4 May 1850; E. Carrasco,CalenPrimaria,1851),29. Also Kubler,IndianCaste ofPeru,34, t. 7. For the best breakdown (with likelymatricula years),consult "La poblaci6n del Peru a lo largo de un siglo," 52; forcritics, see Paz Soldan, Diccionario xxi-xxii. geogrdfico,
dario gufa forasterosla Republica de y de Peruana el aino 1852(Lima:ImpJ de para Instrucci6n
116
POPULATION
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
found a population of 2,461,936.9The increase representeda 23 percent rise over 1850, a galloping rate considering reports of devastatingepidemics of typhoid,cholera,and diphtheriain the sierrain the late 1850s. By this time,the heightof exportprosperity, Peru's population had doubled since its colonial days. A real, if hasty,census had also been recorded, as evident in the detailed provincialbreakdowns by sex and age (but withwomen and childrentellingly lumped together). Many contemporary critiques appeared, like that by Paz Soldan ridiculingits poor an organizationand patent errors(using assumed errorratios,he offers of upper-bound alternative "4,000,000 almas").10Nevertheless,this census marked a new departure in Peruvian statistics,one liable to invite to because it was the first supersede traditional and parish criticism tax recordswithdirectsurveytechniques. The conclusions ofthe1862census lie well withinnineteenth-century trendlines. Peru's firstmodern census, which detailed its preparationsand in procedures,registered 1876, a timewhen theguano boom was collapsing and Peru was approaching its crushingwar with Chile. Directed by Frenchstatistician Georges Marchand and compiledand publishedby the who expertM. A. Fuentes, thecensus mobilized a small armyof officials forthefirst timecollectedminuteoccupational, social, and regionaldata. This information reveals, for example, the profounddiversityof Peru's regional social structures:that 1,554,678 of 2,699,106 Peruvians were deemed Indian; that only 15 percent of the population lived in towns and thatthecountry's (includingmostofPeru's498 confessed "israelitas"); forty-four hundred "haciendas" were home to a quarterof the ruralfolk. The census totalof2.7 millionPeruvians,while open to question thenand now, is still regarded as a "rigorous effort"by the extensive modern and critical literature. The weakest data concernsome provincialstatistics social itemslike occupation and literacy."l More alarmingthan theimper9. For various tables, totals, and critiques,see "La poblaci6n del Peruia lo largo de un siglo," 42-50. For accounts of sierraepidemics in the 1850s, see Pablo Macera, "Las plantaciones azucareras andinas (1821-1875)," in Trabajosde historia,edited by Macera (Lima: Instituto Nacional de Cultura,1977),4:195-96, and census data, 4:277-94. (Paris: E. Didot, matemdtica, fisicay politica de 10. Mateo Paz Soldan, Compendio geograffa, general Lima,2d ed. (Paris: Laine et de 1863),2:454-55; Manuel Anastasio Fuentes,Estadistica (Lima: Imp. La Revista, Harvard,1866),41-43; and HildebrandoFuentes, Cursode estadistica 1907),311. en de del 11. See Peru, Direcci6nde Estadistica,Censogeneral la Repuiblica Peruiformado 1876 see (Lima: Imp. del Estado, 1878), 7 vols.; fora self-critique, M. A. Fuentes's prologue to Resumende censo. For a professionalappraisal, see Arco Parr6, "Sinopsis hist6ricade cende (Lima: Seminariode Histosos," xxxi-xxxiii; Alida Diaz, El censogeneral 1876 en el Perui or T. ria Rural Andina, 1974). For some of many recentuses, see Clifford Smith, "Patternsof War,"in Region Class in and Urban and RegionalDevelopmentin Peru on theEve ofthePacific of ModernPeruvian History, edited by RoryMiller(Liverpool: Institute Latin AmericanStudof ies, University Liverpool,1987),monographno. 14, 77-102; or H. Pintoand A. Goicochea, en Ocupaciones el Peru, 1876 (Lima: Universidadde San Marcos, 1977),4 vols.
117
Review Research Latin American

fections the 1876 census is thefactthatthenextnationalcensus did not of of occur until 1940, three-quarters a centurylater.This hiatus has leftan enormousgap forstudyingtheemergenceofmodernPeru. to Only one workto date has attempted revisenineteenth-century demographichistory, George Kubler'spioneeringTheIndianCasteofPeru, of 1795-1940. Based on a carefularchivalreconstruction 164 "matricula" tax registers,Kubler and his team worked for several years to unravel in on century. Concentrating regionalpatternsofethnicity thenineteenth Indians, the 1952 study does not aim for new aggregate population and published census data (includestimates.Butby combiningregisters ing those of 1836 and 1850), it encompasses a national population of 1,110,150 over the broad intervalof "1826-1854" for use in analyzing ethnicchange.12Kubler also published his originaltax register database, critical evidence forall historians. Kubler's centralfindingis that Peru's Indian majorities actually peaked in theera following independence. Some 59.3 percent(651,993)of between the576 republicansocietywere "Indian," an increase occurring declineto 54.8 percentin 1876,when themodern percentof1795 and their path to mestizaje became apparent. But given thevague periodizationof 1826-1854,the important thesis of "Indianization" remains open. When and why did this trendbegin, how fardid it progressbeforereversing? These issues will be touched on subsequently, during a reanalysis of Kubler'sfigures. In sum, although no historiancan vouch for the veracityof any Peruviancensus, some appear betterdone than others.Overall, the 1791 census remains an indispensable baseline and the 1876 census, the most reliable here. For better or worse, both are ballpark aggregates. The haphazard 1850 and 1862 surveyscan serve at least to suggest a minimal pace ofchange. The 1836 "census," althoughstillemployed by historians,has no value whatsoever.Its distortions dramatizedby simplecalculationsof are annual compound demographicgrowthrates(see table 2).13From1791 to 1836, growthappears to have been modest indeed at 0.23 percent,a rate of23 per 1000-or nil iftheviceroy'shigh guess is takenfor1795. Then in thebriefperiod from1836 to 1850, the rateof growthsupposedly leaped
12. Kubler,IndianCasteofPeru,t. 9 and passim; formy modifications, the discussion see on Indian Peru. 13. The formulais r equals the root numberof years of popl/popO minus 1. These rates differ from thosein 'Aspectos hist6ricos,"Informe slightly del Demogrdfico Perui, 1970,12, due to myhigher1791base year(whichincludesPuno). Even fortheperiod 1876-1940,therateis 1.31 percent.It is mostunlikelythatthestable historic rateof 1 percentis a statistical distorin tion (representingeven 1 percent annual improvements census efficiency). The methnot odology ofthe1850census was patently a 60 percentimprovement overthatof1791. The and resourcebasis forPeru'srelatively consistent recordwillbe explored biological,cultural, in due course.
118
POPULATION
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
TAB L E 2 Unrevised Demographic 1791-1876 Rates, Years

1791-1836 1836-1850 1791-1850 1850-1876 1791-1876
1791-1862
Growth (%)
10.9 45.7 61.5 34.9 117.8
98.7
Span (years)
45 14 59 26 85
71
Annual Rate (%)

0.23 2.73 0.82 1.03 0.92
0.97
Sources: Author'scalculation fromtable 1; annual rate determinedby compound interest formula.Compare withrevisionsshown in table 5.
to 2.73 percentper year: a tenfoldaccelerationcomparableonly with the worstThirdWorld"population explosions" ofthemid-twentieth-century. No reason existsto believe thatPeruvian growthground to a halt during the years of the late colonyand earlyrepublic; forexample, one findsno reportsof crushingepidemics. Nor does any explanationfita phenomenal burst of fecundityin between 1836 and 1850, duringthe heightof Peru's caudillo era. For long-term contrasts,it should be borne in mind thatPeru's yearlydemographicadvance from1791 to 1850 was 0.82 percent and over the fullnine decades (1791-1876),0.92 percent. Such rates are reasonable and consistentones forbuoyantagrariansocieties,which Peru was afterits demographicupswing in the mid-eighteenth century. The 1836 figureis thusnotonlybogus but fartoo low. The great mystery then is the lacuna between 1790 and 1850, six decades evenly divided between colonyand nationhood,and a period of importantshifts in demographic behavior throughoutmuch of Latin America. In the nineteenthcentury, population growth-or more often or "despoblacion" "faltade brazos"-even carried specific political overtones. As one republican observed in 1826, "If the population has been or stationary even diminished,it would be the most flagrant proofof the of that homicidal character thegovernment ruledus untilIndependence."14 Which regime caused the sluggish growth observed until 1836? New evidence blames neither.
14. Paredes, Guia de Limaen 1828,5-6. The obsessive demographicconcernwith"faltade en brazos" is epitomizedby Juande Arona in P. P. Soldan y UnAnue'sLa inmigracion el Perui (Lima: Imp. Universo, 1891). Given Peru's robust naturalpopulation growth,nineteenthelitecriesover "depopulation" appear to have been highlyideological.The underlycentury of ing issue was the availability exploitable(non-Indian) wage labor,as argued by Macera in "Plantaciones azucareras," 68-91, and others.
119
Research Review Latin American

THE LOST 1827 CENSUS
Historians might have suspected that Peru actually attempteda national census in 1827. Clues abound in later census reports and in to if references a "La Mar census."15More surpriscontemporary, cryptic, range, and richness of the survivingdata. Pubing are the accessibility, gazette, La PrensaPeruana,and lished provinceby provincein the official deotherperiodicals between 1827 and 1829, no fewerthan thirty-four Peruvianprovincesof 1827 tailed surveysare available forthefifty-seven Fragments thisdata have alreadybeen published, even in major works of but of demographichistory, withouttheirfullpotentialbeing realized.16 Never aggregated when collected, these accounts cover 914,176 Peruof vians, roughlythree-quarters theknown population in thelate colonial era. enumerate The thirty-four standardized and detailed Estadi'sticas and theyprovide income caste categories(indigenas, castas,and esclavos), estimates for groups by province-a feat not even attemptedin 1876.17
15. See Paredes, Guia de Limaen 1828, 5 (and the 1837 edition); Josede Larrea y Loredo, "Bases para la estadisticadel Peru" (1826), in Tierra poblaci6n el Peru(ss. xviii-xix), y en compiled by Pablo Macera (Lima: Seminario de Historia Rural Andina, 1972), 3:525-55 (originallypublished in La PrensaPeruana,Lima, 1826). See also PrensaPeruana,3 Mar. 1828, and other sources (Memorias de Hacienda). 'Aspectos hist6ricos" describes Larrea's efforts, withoutcitingsources,but simplyconsidersthecensus failedand unpublished(p. 11). Yetits data somehow found theirway into the famous French census collectionof Coquebert de Montbert.Occasionally,even aggregatesare cited fora "La Mar census," as in Arco Parr6's "Sinopsis hist6rica."But thefigureof 1,249,728actuallyrepresentsa common1791 estimate includingPuno. Macera published twenty-nine thedocumentsin his 1972 Tierra poblaci6n of 16. Notably, y (3:557-623), along with later archivalmatriculas.Sanchez-Albornozreproduced twentyof thesein ThePopulation LatinAmerica, 111, t. 4.3. Neitheranalystattempts compileor to of p. analyze thematerialas a viable census. 17. This database provides 59 percent of the 1827 population produced below. Because Peruvianperiodicalcollectionsvaryin breadth(Yale's SterlingLibrary thebest), the "Estais distica"sources listedhereare arrangedin orderofencounterin theofficial gazetteLa Prensa Peruana(PP) or copies in El Telegrafo Lima (TL). For the departmentof Lima: Canta (PP, de 1 Aug. 1827); Lima (PP, 13 Aug. 1828); Chancay (PP, 4 Sept. 1828); Cahete (TL, 25 Aug. 1828); Huarochiri(TL, 16 Oct. 1828); Yauyos(PP, 29 April1828); and Santa (TL, 1 Aug. 1828). For Junin:Pasco (PP, 26 Aug. 1829); Huanuco (PP, 26 Aug. 1829); Jauja(PP, 29 Aug. 1829); Huaylas (PP, 5 Sept. 1829); Huamalies (PP, 5 Sept. 1829); Cajatambo (PP, 25 April 1829); Conchucos Alto/Huari(PP, 12 May 1829); and Conchucos Bajo (PP, 12 May 1829). For La Libertad: Cajamarca (PP, 11 Aug. 1829); Chachapoyas (PP, 11 July1829); and Piura (PP, 24 Feb. 1829). For Cuzco: Abancay (PP, 23 May 1829); Calca y Lares (TL, 26 July 1828); Quispicanchi (PP, 13 May 1828); Urubamba (PP, 14 March 1829); Paucartambo(PP, 17 Mar. 1829); and Paruro (PP, 1 Apr. 1829). For Ayacucho: Huamanga (incomplete,PP, 14 Feb. 1827); Angaraes Huancavelica (PP, 5 Mar. 1829); Parinacochas(PP, 21 Apr. 1829); and Lucanas (TL, 25 Oct. 1828). ForPuno: AzAngaro(PP, 16 Feb. 1829); Carabaya (TL, 3 Jan.1829); Lampa (PP, 27 Dec. 1828); Chucuito (TL, 27 Dec. 1828); and Puno Huancane (TL, 17 Dec. 1828). For Arequipa: Arica/Tacna 5 May 1829). Most stray of descriptions otherprovincesappeared (PP, in late 1829 in bothpapers. The totalofthirty-fourthefullextent published (or promptly is of delivered)data on provincesbecause, withone exception,itsquares withnoticespublished in de by thefinanceministry "Estado de debito en que se hallan las subprefecturas departa-
120
POPULATION
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
the famousEnsayo estadistica de de completa Aza'ngaro JoseDomingo by

Choquehuanca for the province of Azangaro (Puno), which was later published as a seventy-pagebook listingminutely population, propthe erty,activities,and trade of every hamlet in the district.Following the same model, a detailed occupational and foreigncensus of Lima also
These data can thus formthe basis for regional and caste distribution studies,ifnota fullnationalproductestimatefor1827 For example,in the crudest calculation, Peruvian per capita income was a believable 30.4 current pesos in 1827 (with Indians averaging22.8 and non-Indians,45.5 pesos).18 More centralto the presentstudy,the series definitively proves the inauthenticity the 1836 census. All the northerndepartmental of statistics alreadyexisteda decade earlier(the1836 "census" simplycopied 1827 figures),and the population of the southerndepartmentsin 1827 inevitablyexceeded the colonial figuresstill being cited for 1836. This distortionis the centralone in early republican demographicrates, not any lack of data. Moreover, with these new data, historians can now a construct new estimateof the total1827 population, a reliableone that can resolvemanyofthemysteries enumeratedabove. The first ordersto conducta republicanmatriculacensus, forfiscal and electoralpurposes, were issued in early 1826. The head count was managed by Peru'scapable Ministro Hacienda, Josede Larreay Loredo. de His introductory treatise written census takersin the "Juntas for Departamentales" elaborates theoreticaland practical aspects of statisticsand even venturesa preliminary calculationof the population.19Ifbirthrates were "normal" between 1795 and 1826, Peru's population should have approached 1,700,000by 1826,includingslave and whiteimmigrants. The actual expansion, however,would have been slower in the era of colonial crisis. By August 1827, thefirst provincialEstadi'sticas began appearing in theLima press; by mid-1829,thirty-four been published (see table3). had Some local statisticians were extremely zealous. One survivingsample is
mentos. .. por contribuciones"(Telegrafo,13 Dec. 1828) and "Raz6n del numero de contribuyentescomprendidosen los departamentosde la Republica" (PrensaPeruana, Mar. 1829). 5 But a few matriculaswere also published forthe later1830s, and thisaccountdoes notlimit the numberof censuses actuallymounted in the 1820s. Kubler,forexample, cites an 1834 documentalludingto 118 earlyregisters. 18. These estimatescan be further developed to help measure growthand distribution the century; an alternativetax-based calculation produces a comparable28.4 throughout pesos ofper capita income.Bothare "ballpark"figures, closelytrailing estimatesforMexico, as expected. On Mexico, see JohnH. Coatsworth,"Obstacles to EconomicGrowthin Nineteenth-Century Mexico," American Review83, no. 1 (Feb. 1978):81-85. Historical 19. Larrea, "Bases para la estadistica,"3:543-49. Larrea's estimateassumed a naturalnet increase of 14,103 annually from1790, 1500 in slave imports(a high late-colonialratethat historians notaddress),and 300 in European immigration. his increaseof472,859over do But a population in the 1790s cited as 1,325,000has been adjusted downward because Larrea actuallyuses thefirst republicanPuno estimatesof205,000in his base.
121
Review American Latin Research

But de de of comerciallospueblos Lima JoseMaria Cordova y Urrutia.20 other y historica, geogrdfica survives,which predates the similar1837 Estadf'stica
prefects,particularly the far north (La Libertad) and far south (Arein of quipa), lapsed in zeal, as mightbe expected in zones at thefringes the Lima state. March 1829 (covering237,783Indian A summaryfiscalreportfrom laments the factthatthirteenprovinces remained and casta tributaries) (Departmentof unreported: Cangallo, Huamanga, and Castrovirreyna Ayacucho); Aymaraes(Cuzco); Huamachuco, Chota, and Jaen(La Liberhad actuallydelivereditscensus).21 tad); and all ofArequipa (Tacna-Arica were complete: the vast and centralmesBut several entiredepartments with its eightprovinces(263,111,one-halfof tizo zone of Junin-Ancash, themcasta); and forthe first time,all fiveprovincesof the dense Indian of altiplano territory Puno (200,250, 94.3 percent of them Indian). The of department Lima lacked onlytheprovinceofIca, and thecensus forthe capital itself(at 58,326) is new to historians. Coastal slave populations, while unspecifiedforurban Lima, Ica, and Trujillo,are also crucialfindings datingjust after disruptionsduringtheindependence era. All the the matriculas display documented changes since the 1790s (one official responsibility was to compare rises and falls since 1793). Theirvariation underscores, along with archivalevidence, the actual occurrenceof the new head counts. Each report includes up-to-date descriptionsof the for economyand geographyof each province(indicating, example,those with survivingcottageindustries),even fromthe statistically delinquent zones.22
de de 20. J.D. Choquehuanca, Ensayode estadistica completa los ramos econ6micos-politicosla en Provincia Azangaro el Departamento Puno de la Republica de de Peruanaen el quinquenio desde 1825 hasta 1829 inclusive(Lima: M. Corral, 1833); J.M. C6rdova y Urrutia,Estadistica historica, geogrdfica, industrial comercial los pueblosque componen provincias Departay de las del de mento Lima(Lima: Imp. Instrucci6n Primaria, 1839),chap. 7.These figures probablydate to as earliermatriculas, seen in published updates in Telegrafo(Huarochiriand Chancay,8 Mar. 1837,12 Aug. 1837) and in La Misceldnea (Lima) (Chancay y Santa, 25 Jan.1831,and Puno, 26 Jan. 1831). Following the same model is a detailed mid-1830seconomic census of Huaraz (Huaylas) laterpublished in El Comercio (Lima), Dec. 1839-Jan. 1840. C6rdova y Urrutiapossiblyused the unstudied Lima census of 1831, which covers occupations, nationality, and neighborhoodcomposition;an archivalversionof Districts1 and 4 is foundin the Biblioteca of in Municipalde Lima.All evidence pointsto a flurry undiscoveredcensus activity theearly republic. 21. "Raz6n de nuimero contribuyentes de comprendidosen los departamentosde la Repuiblica,"PrensaPeruana,5 Mar. 1829; "Estado de debito en que se hallan las subprefecturas de departamentos... por contribuciones,"Telegrafo,13 Dec. 1829. 22. The Lima census ("ProvinceofCercado," withnearbyvillagesand haciendas) is found in PrensaPeruana,13 Sept. 1828, population 58,326 and income (riqueza)of $5,008,177Jose Serrathought thistotaltoo low by one-third. is based, however, a flat It on 50,000withincity walls and does not differentiate urban Indians and slaves. (Rory Miller pQintsout tricky boundary problems in Lima censuses.) Overall, these totals were reported for slaves: Caiiete, 2,132; Chancay,3,799; Lima (haciendas), 4,602; and Santa, 374. Provincesreporting wereYauyos,Quispicanchi, Chachapoyas, Cajamarca, Huanuco, Contaxablemanufactures
122
POPULATION
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
in In sum, in Peru's first republican "empadronamiento" 1827, officials exhibiteda rarethoroughnessforthe nineteenthcentury. is thus It the only matriculacensus worthyof the name, given the factthat the Peruviantaxationsystemwas soon to begin its inexorabledecline during in therestof the nineteenthcentury:first, the politicalbreakdown of the caudillo period, and after1850, in the fiscal affluenceand laxityof the guano era. This factexplains why most ofKubler's archivalregisters date between 1826 and 1830, and why his figuresclosely matchthe numbers were estabpublished from1827 to 1829. Far more registers(fifty-eight) lished in thelate-1820sthan in 1836 (ten), or even duringthe social peace And these totalsconsideronly thelocated ofthelate 1840s (twenty-nine). records,as by 1830,Peruviantreasurydocumentsexhibiteda completely revised national tax base. In short,the 1827 census data not only supersede those of 1836, theyappear superior to the census of 1850.23Moreover,these data can be takeneven further.
THE PERUVIAN POPULATION IN 1827
a Fromthese and additionalsources, scholarscan construct verifiable estimateforPeru's post-independencepopulation. Of thethreetypes ofdata used, themain buildingblockconsistsofthethirty-four provinces reporting new directdata for1827. The combined population of these thirty-four varied zones was 914,176,with66 percent(603,057)considered "Indian." Due to boundary can changes, however,onlythirty provinces(with839,735inhabitants) be compared directlywith those of 1791-1793. Their combined increase
desuyos, Pasco, Jauja,Huaylas, Huamalies, Lambayeque, Cangallo, Piura, Paruro,Parinacochas, Cajatambo, Abancay,Huari, Santa, Lampa, Chuquito, and Puno. These reportsinclude descriptions.The patternof productionwas woolens in the south and cottonstoward the north.In 1826 Larrea estimatedthat25,000 familieswere already out of work (with an importcompetition.See Larrea, "Bases para la estaincomeloss oftwo millionpesos) from became a leader in Peru's early distica,"542. Perhaps thisis thereason why thisstatistician J. que protectionist movement.See Josede Larrea y Loredo, Principios sigui6el ciudadano de de Larreay Loredoen el Ministerio Hacienda y Secci6nde NegociosEclesidsticos que estuve de encargado (Lima: J.M. Concha, 1827). 23. Kubler,IndianCaste ofPeru, t. 1. Ideally,the totalover the period 1826-1854,at fiveyear intervals,would be 348 registers;118 were known to existby 1834. See J.M. Pando, al el de en de Peruana, findelaino 1830,presentado Memoria sobre estado la Haciendade la Repuiblica Congreso J.M. Pando (Lima: J.Masias, 1831), app. 4, "Estado que manifiestalo debido por cobraren las contribuciones directaspor un aho, terminomedio, de julio de 1826 a dic. de 1829."On the tax base generally, consultJoseSerra, "Memoria sobre el curso y progresode y en (ss. las contribuciones, 1831," in Macera's Tierra poblaci6n el Perui xviii-xix)(1977) 2:441should have appeared 51. Since Kubler'sstudyoverthirty yearsago, newlylocated registers in theArchivoGeneral de la Naci6n (mostlyin AGN sec. H-4, whereI counted 56 listed for the late 1820s, some not used by Kubler). Others are surfacingin regional archives. For a (the "patentes" business tax), see Paul Gootenrecentstudybased on archivaltax registers berg, 'Artisans and Merchants: The Making of an Open Economy in Lima, Peru, 1820 to 1981. 1860,"M.Phil. thesis,OxfordUniversity,
123
Review Research LatinAmerican for Published 1827 Censuses Peruvian TABL E 3 Provincial Province
Lima Lima (Cercado) Chancay Canta Cainete Huarochiri Yauyos Santa Total Junin Pasco Jauja Huanuco Huamalies Cajatambo Huaylas Conchucos Alto (Huari) Conchucos Bajo Total La Libertad/Amazonas Cajamarca Piura Chachapoyas Total Puno Azangaro Huancane (Puno) Carabaya Chucuito Lampa Total
Cuzco
Income Total over Increase (pesos) 1793 figuresIndians Castas Population

58,326 18,712 13,932 13,892 16,549 12,276 2,594 136,281f 37,050 61,023 14,534 13,172 18,464 49,667 25,091 44,110 263,111 41,993 53,818 14,508 110,319' 43,416 36,569 18,936 52,451 48,878 200,250 26,865 14,918 12,929 12,126 35,738 13,097 115,673P n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. n.d. 41,072 35,381 17,588 49,296 45,513 2,344 1,182 1,348 3,155 3,365 861,988 624,749 468,960 1,147,502 1,131,764
4,234,963o
-5,416 4,766 1,799 1,276 2,525 2,702 -740
2,549 10,791 12,368 10,243 16,140 10,981 617
n.d.a 3,869,362b 661,717 4,122c 347,992 1,564 416,661 1,517d 381,526 409 256,277 1,295 83,634 1,603e
2,139 8,737 -2,292 -1,062 1,592 8,845 43,893i 61,852
19,380g 37,854 9,048 7,121 11,321 25,409 6,387 15,069
17,660 23,169 5,486 6,051 7,143 24,250 18,754 29,041
1,035,521h 1,653,314 597,485 373,993 491,548 1,134,258 716,485 857,687 6,860,291i 1,009,904 1,097,350 349,299
131,589i 131,554 20,206 22,872 4,233
21,787 30,943 9,327 -10,398?k 10,275
44,250m 188,850n 11,394 2,528 5,668i -7,307i -8,110 10,179 6,899 23,033 9,530 12,278 9,760 30,654 11,812 3,832 5,388 651 2,366 4,884 1,285
Quispicanchi Urubamba Paucartambo Paruro Abancay Calca y Lares Total
949,733 695,101 310,271 406,977 798,139 456,489
124
POPULATION
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
TAB LE 3 (continued) Province Ayacucho Huamangaq Angaraes (Huancavelica) Parinacochas Lucanas

Total
Increase over Population 1793figures Indians Castas 6,498 20,272 31,354 10,233
68,357r
Total Income (pesos)
n.d. 11,881k 15,343 -5,492 16,819 23,942 7,551
n.d. 3,453 7,412 2,682 874,498 494,634 492,677
Arequipa Arica (Tacna) Total
20,185 20,185s
1,409
10,545
9,640
668,017
National totalst 914,176 603,057u311,119v 27,651,000w La Sources: Prensa El de see Peruana, 1827-1829; Telegrafo Lima, 1827-1829; also n. 17ofthis article.
b$5,157,859;alternative gross estimate Limaincome "1/4 higher." for is cAnd 3,799 slaves. dAnd 2,132 slaves. eAnd 374 slaves. Ica fMissing and Callao; forLima Indians and slaves, suburbsonly. Cerro de Pasco. gExcluding mines. hExcluding !Seems to includeboth "Conchucos"; boundaries uncertain. jIndians are 50 percentofthe provincialtotal;totalincomerepresents26.1 pesos per capita. kBoundary change likelyexplains unusual negativeor positivefigure. 'Missing Lambayeque, Chota, Huamachuco, Jaen,Maynas, and Pataz. to mAccording the 1797 census. n94.3percentofthepopulation. 021.2 pesos per capita. qCastrovirreyna district, incomplete. rMissingpartofHuamanga and Cangallo, Huanta, Andahuaylas, and Tayacaja. t34provincesout of57.
aNo separate haciendas. data,but4,602slaveson suburban
and PMissing Cercado, Aymaraes, Cotabambas, Chumbivilcas, Tinta.
and sMissing Cercado, Caylloma, Camana,Condesuyos, Moquegua, Tarapaca. u66percent thepopulation. of
vIncludes10,907slaves and undifferentiated "casta" populations ofLima and Huamanga. w30.4 pesos per capita (incomes includetaxes).
comes to 162,112 over 1791, accounting for 58.4 percent of Peru's total increase. Thus theirexpansion rate of 23.9 percent over thirty-six years alreadyrepresentsa farmore reasonable pace than previous ratesbased on the longer lapse to 1836, and in conservativefashion, exceeds those estimatesbased on weaker data. Overall,thesepublished data accountfor 59 percentofthe 1827 population estimate(see table 4). The nextstep is to locate and fitdata forthe missingtwenty-three 125
Review LatinAmerican Research

in TA B L E 4 Peruvian Population 1827 Province Lima Cercado Callao Chancay Canta Caniete Huarochiri Yauyos Santa Ica Total junlin Pasco Jauja Huanuco Huamalies Cajatambo Huaylas Huari Conchucos Bajo Total La Libertad Cajamarca Piura Chota Lambayeque Huamachuco Jaen Trujillo Total Puno Azangaro Carabaya Chucuito Lampa Total Source Population 1827 CU 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 K1836 58,326 6,516 18,712 13,932 13,892 16,549 12,276 2,594 18,031 160,828 37,050 61,023 14,534 13,172 18,464 49,667 25,091 44,110 263,111 41,993 53,818 44,953 43,202 43,058 6,706 12,032 245,762 436,4569 18,936 52,451 48,878 200,250 Province Cuzco Cercado Quispicanchi Urubamba Paucartambo Paruro Abancay Calca y Lares Aymaraes Cotabambas Chumbivilcas Tinta Source Population 1832 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 1832 K 1832 1832,K 40,000 26,865 14,918 12,929 12,126 34,738 13,097 18,638 21,979 19,048 36,109 250,447 18,167 20,272 31,354 16,325 13,843 22,847 22,850 11,857 20,156 177,671 20,185 50,769 18,676 10,661 20,658 30,330 9,171 160,450 14,508 26,101 17,565
1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 I K1836 K1836 K1836 K1836a
1827 1827 1827 1827 1827
Total Ayacucho K Huamanga Huancavelica 1827 Parinacochas 1827 I Cangallo Lucanas K Huanta I Andahuaylas K Castrovirreyna I Tayacaja I,K Total Arequipa Arica/Tacna 1827 Cercado I I Caylloma Camana I Condesuyos I I Moquegua I,K Tarapaca Total Amazonas Chachapoyas Maynas PaTotal 1827 1814 K1836
National total 1,516,693 See for For see Sources: text explanation. 1827 2; the registers census, table K denotes Kubler the is by using 1836"census";1832 theCuzcocensus; covering 1826-1830; cited Kubler, K36, I stands interpolated for 1814refers theMaynassurvey that to of year; figures, 1791-1850; andCU stands C6rdova Urrutia's figure. for 1837 y
a1836figures basedon 1791census. actually
126
POPULATION
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
provinces from Kubler'sworkand othersources.Kubler'smeticulous all study provides archival 164 population registers, virtually 58ofhis and earliest counts (1827-1830) crosscheck with well 1827 published figures or differ onlyby minimal updates.Additional earlyregisters from Kubler, the 1836 "census" (thosedatingclearly thelate 1820s),and reliable to from 1832Cuzco survey serve usabledatafor all items the as sixteen the of Thissecondpopulation block an comes 395,228, to with increase of 88,037 since1791, 31.8percent thetotal or of treated expansion. Provinces in thiswayincludeIca, Huamachuco, Jaen, Pataz,Cuzco (thetown,or cercado), Aymaraes, Cotabambas, Chumbivilcas, Tinta, Huamanga,Lucanas, and Andahuaylas. new data existforTrujillo, by all acNo but counts,its population barelyadvanced.The Maynasfigure 26,101 of a comes from separate 1814parish a one survey, more rigorous thanmost forAmazoniaand also inherently conservative.25 Boundary changes by 1827arealso amended with published here.Combined the blockconsideredabove,thecalculation nowencompasses with forty-eight provinces inhabitants. Directdata thusforms 85.2 percent the total of 1,292,963 estimate 1827and morethannine-tenths Peru'snew population for of growth. remain ones: thenewnorthern Onlynineprovinces truly sketchy of province Chota;and in thesouth,Cangallo,Huanta,Castrovirreyna, Condesuyos, Caylloma, Arequipa(cercado), Camana, and Moquegua. Themethod used for category toadd one-half their this was of expansion overtheperiodfrom 1791to 1850,a modest risein mostcases and one withextant This third consistent Kublerregisters.26 interpolated block contributes to 223,730 14.8percent) thetotal (or population 1827Their for slower rate since1791underscores conserthe expansion of15.8percent vative taken with weakest the data. approach Thefinal of one million-isthenew figure 1,516,693-or and a half
detailedbreakdownof(pub24. See Kubler,IndianCasteofPeru,extendedtt.2-3. Another lished) provincialstatistics be foundin "Poblaci6ndel Peru a lo largode un siglo," 62-81; can and in its 1832 Cuzco census, 30 (fortheoriginalversion,see Flores, Gufadel Cuzco). 25. For discussion of populations of Amazonia, see "Poblaci6n del Peru a lo largo de un siglo," 27-29, 62. In thisregionof Peru, European disease was stilltakinga tollin the nineand Indianization,by means ofliteralreconquestof settler teenthcentury, groups,went on untilthe 1850s. their 26. For the south, new surveyswill likelysurface,as regional historiansintensify records).This estimate,alwork (in Buenos Aires or by researching Bolivianconfederation is or but ternatively, could have used annual geometric, provincial, caste ratios, thedifference minimal. See my discussion and table 7 of this article.For some recentsouthernparish deA Study(Boulder, mography, Noble David Cook, ThePeopleoftheColca Valley: Population see y social:historia Colo.: Westview-Dellplain, 1982);orLuis Miguel Glave, "Demografia conflicto de las comunidadescampesinas en los Andes del sur,"IEP Documento de Trabajo23 (Lima: Instituto Estudios Peruanos, 1988). Both these sources include some post-independence de material.
24 missingprovinces.
127
Review LatinAmerican Research 1791-1940 Rates Peruvian TABL E 5 Revised Demographic of Population Growth, Years Covered Revised 1791-1827 1827-1850 1827-1862 1827-1876 Context 1791-1850 1850-1876 1791-1876 1876-1940 Growth (%) 22.4 31.9 62.3 77.9 61.5 34.9 117.8 130.0 Time Span (years) 36 23 35 49 59 26 85 64 Annual Rate (%) 0.56 1.21 1.39 1.18 0.82 1.03 0.92 1.31
from ratecomputed compound Sources: Author's calculations tables 2, and4; annual 1, by interest formula.
estimate the Peruvian of 61.6 populationin 1827 Of thesePeruvians, were Indians,following paralleltabulation. a percent ExceptforAreof and the perennial quipa, partsof La Libertad, mystery Amazonia, to thesefigures unlikely change much,even if new data should are falls of of surface. overall The estimate short Larrea's loose projection 1.7 it the but calculation million, then should, beinga conservative following late turbulent colonial the is years.Likeall surveys, final figure probably "low."Butits deviation from another series-Peru'sreal populationis thaninthebestcensusdataavailable. no likely greater Whatdoes a 1.5 million in population 1827revealaboutdemographic growth Peru?Priorto thisestimate, in Peruvian demographic ratesappearedbizarre.Between1791and 1836,growth seemedessennil to tially at a 0.23percent annualrate, before suddenly accelerating an 2.73 rate 1836and 1850.Byeliminating equallyaberrant percent between thebogus 1836census and substituting largerand empirical the 1827 are count,theseobviousdistortions eliminated table5). The result (see now shows thatPeru'spopulationgrewby an estimated 22.4 percent between1791 and 1827 and by 31.9 percent between1827 and 1850. Annualcompound growth rateswerethen 0.56and 1.21percent respecwithin trend 0.82registered theentire a of over tively, spanofsixdecades. the Bycomparison, ratefor1827-1876 1.18percent for1791-1876, is and 0.92percent; eventhemodern trend is (1876-1940) closeat1.31percent. These demographic ratesof 0.6 to 1.3 percent represent typical ones forbuoyant the societies.For example, comparable preindustrial andWalesjustprior theindustrial to was pace in England revolution 0.71
128
POPULATION
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
percent;also, nineteenth-century Mexico grewby 0.83 percentannually.27 The new ratesare also in line with Peru's long-term demographictrajecfrom toryafter country's the belated mid-eighteenth century recuperation the Indian biological holocaust of the conquest era. Peruvian growth patternsremained notably stable until the (again belated) "population explosion" following World War II, despite an earlier acceleration of migration, urbanization,and mestizaje. Broad social, economic, and culturalfactorsmust have accounted forthese changes, or bettersaid, lack of change. Supporting studies of and parish-levelfertility mortality patternsare sorely needed, although they will not likely reveal uniformity across Peru's highly fragmented regionaland ethnicsocieties.28 One generalization be made, however. can Witha characteristic the half-century Peru exhibited extensive"ancien lag, regime" form of demographic growth identifiedby Nicolas SanchezAlbornoz forall of Latin America since 1700. In Peru, high ruralfertility and and low life expectancy,based on "natural" Malthusian restraints While stilldifficult possibilities,reignedlong intothenineteenth century. to assess, biological immunitiesappeared set by the late-colonial era, althoughthe incidence of epidemic disease did not sharplyabate in the nineteenth century.On the one hand, modest gains over traditional disease were reported fromvaccination campaigns in 1805-6 and the mid-1840s,but new scourges, chieflytyphoid and yellow feverin the countrysideand cholera in the towns, entered the Andes with force, On peaking withthesierranpandemics in thelate 1850s.29 theotherhand,
edited by D. Glass and D. E. C. Eversley(London: E. Arnold, 27. See Population History, in Population estimate,see R. D. Lee and R. S. Schofield,"British 1965); forthe newer British History Britain of since1700, edited by R. Floud in theEighteenthCentury,"in The Economic Press, 1981), 1:17-35. It is worthnotand D. McCloskey (Cambridge: Cambridge University evidentin provincialcomparisonsofthe1790s and 1827lends supportto ing thatthestability was based on parish records,the second on fiscalcounts. both censuses because thefirst than any single one of its 28. In general,the aggregateis likelyto have greaterreliability to provincialbuilding blocks. At this point, it is very difficult generalize support fromthe such as handfulofparish, tributary, district or studies with data on the nineteenthcentury, and Glave's "Demografiay conflicto social," and theworkof Cook's PeopleoftheColca Valley and Mario Cirdenas Ayapoma, to be citedsubseJeanPiel, Carlos Contreras,Nils Jacobsen, in quently.Such sources clearlyshow population growthmosteverywhere thelate colonial published by Sanchez-Albornozin Popularevistas era, as seen in the 1770s-1820stributary t. tionofLatinAmerica, 4.4. Birthrates usually increasesomewherebetween 1720and 1760but There were no exhibitvariable (or more unstable) patternsin the early nineteenthcentury. signs yetof decreasingmortality. Two brief we 29. Unfortunately, lack any epidemiology study of the nineteenthcentury. surveysare Macera, "Plantaciones azucareras," 195-96 (largelybased on ArchibaldSmith's account in Nils Jacobsen,"Landtenureand Societyin thePerudescriptions);and the fuller of Berkevian Altiplano:Azingaro Province,1770-1920,"Ph.D. diss., University California, demography and social change. See also ley,1982,31-37, one ofthefewstudiesthatintegrate in Sanchez-Albornoz'sdiscussion in Population LatinAmerica,120-21, as well as chaps. 4-5 forhis regionaldemographicstages. N. D. Cook also findsbroad "Malthusian"patterns;see PopulationChange in Andean Peru: ParishofYanque," in StudCook, "Eighteenth-Century
129
Review Latin American Research abundance of was by Peru'sconsistently fertility abetted a relative high fact chiefly accessible land. The remarkable is that economic resources, Peru'sIncan populationlevel of some nine millionand its man-land century. densities werenot achievedagain untilfarintothetwentieth rather than from Elasticfood supplies derivedfromthese conditions in and markets productivity thiscentury a halfoflargely or expanding thus seems to ruraleconomy. Peruviandemographic growth stagnant a where thanin other partsofLatinAmerica, havebeen moreconsistent market shift dependence, falling "modern" upward(basedon deepening had and mobility) already begunbythe1850s. deathrates, enhanced demographic dividebetweenthelatecolonialand Peru'sspecific The but earlyrepublican periodsis stillnoticeable, farless pronounced. at a recovery 56 per 1000 late-colonial period experienced continuing to immunities tradithe annually, revealing trendof Andeanbiological tionalEurasian diseases(theSpanishevenhelpedwiththeir rapiddiffuand sionofsmallpox vaccination). Although sporadic droughts epidemics multiple calamigrowth after 1800, (as in 1801-1805) havemoderated may the over economic dislocations tiesensuedduring conflict independence: and migrarecruitment, political after 1810,directcasualties,military then aboutexpected population correct, Peru was tions.IfLarrea's hunch And ifso, without crisis, forfeited some200,000 "souls"to thecrisis. the until1827wouldhaveparalleled typically the Peruvian of rate expansion 90 per1000. Whatever case,themoststriking conclusion that populais the the Peruwas recovering a pace muchlikeEngland's at tionof late-colonial "take-off." demographic Following independence, during great its agrarian rate induceda quickened of121per 1000overthenext quartercatch-up before off from to 130per1000over 100 ranging century, leveling to rates Whether divideofindependence the constitutes inconthenext century. of of colonialism versusthe trovertible proof theoppression a backward of is to judgment. republic bestleft thereader's enlightened policies a free Theidea ofa late-imperial legendis hardtoswallow. black the verify Apartfrom checksalreadynoted,severalcalculations and amplify meaning the1827population the of total.One suchcalculaitself tion is regionalchange in Peru, whichlike populationgrowth until leastthe1860s.In table6, at stable appearstohavebeenremarkably intonorthern, In Peruis divided and central, southern departments. 1791 with the theIndiansouthpredominated 52.6 percent; mestizo, commerand center followed with 28.3percent; theagrarian north cial,and mining of for The new statistics 1827as wellas housed19.1percent population. a the1850censusreveal strongly colonial distribution. only The persisting
ies in SpanishAmerican Population History, edited by David Robinson (Boulder,Colo.: Westview,1981),243-70.
130
POPULATION
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
TA B L E 6 Regional Populations Peru,1791-1876 of Year 1791

1827
South (%) 651,659

(52.6) 788,817 (52.0)
Central (%) 350,371

(28.3) 423,937 (28.0)
North (%) 237,167

(19.1) 303,939 (20.0)
Total 1,239,197
1,516,693
1836a 1850 1862 1876
668,802
417,423
287,511
1,373,736 2,001,123 2,461,936 2,699,106
1,035,348 (51.7) 1,076,134 (43.7) 1,023,286 (379)
590,776 (29.5) 809,287 (32.9) 997,196 (370)
374,999 (18.8) 576,515 (23.4) 678,624 (25.1)
Sources: Table 1 and table 3. The South is defined as the departmentsof Arequipa, Puno, Cuzco, Ayacucho,and new subdivisions;the CentralcategoryincludesLima, Junin-Ancash, and Ica; theNorthis La Libertad,Piura,Amazonas, and new subdivisions. The 1791figures census. representtherectified to aAberrant trend;the 1836census is no longervalid.
anomaly emerges when including the invalid 1836 census, which natuthe with rallyunderestimated south. Peru'sregionalinertiaeven contrasts other"traditional" Latin Americancountries,such as Mexico, wheredeep transformations starteda century regionaldemographic had before.30 This pattern began to change onlyby 1862,as theguano era helped invigorate regions linked to thePeruvian centralcoast. The population of Lima itself,infused by a novel internalmigration,doubled to roughly as 120,000by the end of the guano era.31By 1876 its pull showed clearly, thePeruvian centerand south became virtually even at 38 percent-a far
30. The relationofregionalismto demographyis direct,forexample, in consolidatingthe a regionalcultural family or patterns behind stableextensivegrowth, pointoftenmade even Tutino's analysisin in European demographichistory. comparisonwithMexico, see John For to Press, 1986), From Insurrection Revolution Mexico(Princeton,N.J.:PrincetonUniversity in peripheriesgrew rapidlyin the app. C. In contrast Peru, Mexico's non-Indian (northern) to different ethnicand social courseby the nineteenth century, setting country a radically the on 1870s. Peru'srelativeregional stability also suggests thebroadesthypothesispossible about or Peruvian demographichistory:since 1700, the half-century more lag evident in initial the marpopulation recoveries,social change, and mestizaje have largelyreflected long-term ginalization of the Andean economy,relativeto the "newer" and economicallydynamic societies ofLatin America. See thesubsequent discussion ofsocial change. in figures Fuentes, 31. Miller, "The PopulationProblemofLima"; see also detailedmigration Estadi'stica Lima,625-26. The 37,000 new internalmigrants de (morethan55,000by 1865) say a greatdeal about thealleged immobility nineteenth-century populations. Internalmigraof tionwas also markedin thecentralsierra,theotherregionofvigorousexpansion duringthe laboral economia Mineros campesinos losAndes:mercado en y guano era. See Carlos Contreras, y en de campesina la sierra central, sigloxix (Lima: Instituto Estudios Peruanos, 1987),pt. 3.
131
Latin American Research Review the in cryfrom traditional pattern whichmorethanhalfofall Peruvians "mancha india." eventhisdevelopment But the livedinoraround southern of mustnotbe overstated a clearresult socialchange.In largepart,it as thatsweptsouthern reflected devastating the typhoid epidemics simply somereports seemexaggerated, Perubetween1856and 1859.Although casualties(concentrated among Indians of the punas) ran as high as in this If 300,000 Cuzco, Puno,and Arequipa.32 accurate, tollis sufficient shift revealed the1862census. by to explain entire the regional the Scant census data existforpinpointing keyregionaldivide for coastand sierra. Twocontemporary estimates the1790sand between in remarkable continuity: botheras,abouta quarter 1870srevealanother in three-quarters the ofthenationlivedon thecoastand theremaining In minimal socioand respects, Peruexhibited highlands montania. other In century. 1900 the country demographic change in the nineteenth in reportthe of countries ranked lowest urbanization all LatinAmerican inhabiPeruvian townsexceeded10,000 ingdata (7.4percent). Onlyfive All tants.33 and all, theseglobally stableconditions underlay Peru'sconin sistent pattern. growth the"oldregime" test One final ofthenew1827population can figure be culledfrom of by other fiscaldocuments thetime:a tributary-ratio estimate departof ment.The first sourceis an official 1829 inventory the numbers of in pubThe Indianand castataxpayers sixdepartments. secondsource, de listsall "average"late-1820s lishedwiththe 1830Memoria Hacienda, in from pesos in everydepartment: all, 1,033,402 direct taxesexpected from contribucion the decastas, lessthan137,000 and Indiantribute, 431,784 in assortedproperty businesstaxes.This survey also revealshow and actualcollection mestizos.34 waned,particularly amongrestless quickly
32. Jacobsen,"Landtenure and Society in Azangaro," 31-39 (as reportedby Tschudi). Azangaro's population fellby about 20 percentbetween the1850 and 1862censuses, remaining stagnantuntil1876. I stillhave doubts about catastrophic global estimatescitedforthese epidemics, such as ArchibaldSmith's"one-quarter"ofthepeasants of Cuzco. Indians were usually protectedby highland dispersal patterns.The aggregatecensus data (see table 1 of thisarticle)show 10 percentdeclines in Cuzco between 1850 and 1862 (where150,000reputedly perished),28 percentin Puno, yetlarge increases in Ayacuchoand Huancavelica. 33. Calculated fromdata in "Poblacion del Peru a lo largo de un siglo." For coast-sierra breakdowns, see Larrea's estimatefor1790, "Bases para la estadistica,"540-41; and Smith, "Patternsof Urban and Regional Development," 78. By 1940 the coast held 30 percentof see population,a move towardpre-Columbian patterns. urbanization, Sanchez-Albornoz, On Population LatinAmerica, 5.13. of t. de 34. The two documentsare Ministerio Hacienda, "Razon del nuimero contribuyentes de comprendidosen los departamentos la Republica," PrensaPeruana,5 Mar. 1829; and for de averageprovincial revenues,"Estado que manifiesta debido cobrar cobradoen las contribulo y medio ... de julio de 1826a dic. 1829,"in Pando, Memoria ciones directaspor un anlo,termino de Haciendaen 1830, app. 4. An even more detailedbreakdowncan be found in "Estado de d6bitoen que se hallanlas subprefecturas departamentos porcontribuciones," de ... Tele'grafo, 13 Dec. 1828. Similaraccountsappeared in thelate 1840s:Analesde la hacienda puTblica Peru, del editedbyP. EmilioDancuart(Lima: Imp. Stolte,1903),4:49, 5:215.Itis doubtful, givenPeru'sinthat ethnic theselater terveningfiscal decay, comparative populations canbe derived from records.
132
POPULATION
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
TA B L E 7 Tributary IndexEstimate Peruvian for 1826-1830 Population, Indian 1827 CensusTotals Expected Revenues Ave,1826-29a Tributaries, Population Percentages Comparisons Department (inpesos) NumbersbEstimatecComparedd (% difference) Lima Indian Casta Total taxes Junin Indian Casta Total taxes La Libertad India Casta Total taxes Puno Indian Casta Total taxes
Cuzco
73,945 86,101 261,343 130,270 104,383 246,905 129,796 84,638 217,953 212,885 13,404 225,289 264,805 47,032 317,591 128,276 41,860 176,747 94,420 54,364 157,164
14,643 21,525
70,870 44.2/470 89,330 160,200 160,828(0.3)
25,796 26,069
124,853 53.6/50.0 108,297 233,150 263,111(11.3)d,e
25,702 21,160
124,399 58.6/50.1 87,812 212,211f 245,762(13.6)
42,155 3,351
204,032 96.6/94.3 13,907 217,939 200,250(8.8)e
Indian Casta Total taxes
52,437 11,758
253,793 83.9/79.5 48,796 302,589 250,447(20.8)
Ayacucho Indian Casta Total taxes Arequipa Indian Casta Total taxes
25,401 10,465
122,942 73.9/73.0 43,430 166,372 177,671(6.3)
18,697 13,591
90,494 61.6/45.0 56,403 146,897 160,450(8.4) 133
Review LatinAmerican Research

TA B L E 7 (continued) Revenues Indian 1827 CensusTotals Expected Population Percentages Comparisons Ave,1826-29a Tributaries, (inpesos) NumbersbEstimatecComparedd (% difference) Department All Peru Indian Casta Total taxes 1,033,402 431,784 1,604,001 204,634 107,946 990,429 68.9/61.6 447,976 1,438,405g 1,516,693h(5.1)
Sources: For an explanation of method, see text. On caste revenues, Pando, Memoria de Hacienda en 1830, app. 4, "Estado que manifiesta lo debido cobrar en contribuciones"; on tributary ratios: "Razon de contribuyentes de los departamentos," Prensa Peruana, 5 Mar. 1829; tables 4 and 8 of this article. aTotal figures in this column are expected tax revenues, not just Indian and casta tributes. bTributary numbers were calculated by dividing the expected revenues for Indians by 5.05 and that of castas by 4.00 (average tribute ratios). cThese estimates were calculated by multiplying the number of Indians by 4.84 and the number of castas by 4.15 (average family-size ratios). dFirst departmental Indian percentage is from this estimate, the second from 1827 (see table 8). ejunin and Puno differences due only to tributary ratio averaging. fRevenue figures exclude Amazonas; with Amazonas, departmental population is 270,385. gIncluding the Amazonas figure of 58,174, the total is 1,496,579. hAll population figures in column from table 4. With Amazonas figures in estimate, the total (national) difference reduces to 1.3 percent.
Thefirst hereis tocalculate task ratios family and average tributary ratesand collections over size. Head-tax variedconsiderably theseyears, as didthefamily associated unit with eachtaxpayer. and OnlyJunin Puno set and enjoya complete ofpopulation, tributary, revenue data,butJunin was also the country's and largestmestizodepartment Puno the most in As Indiandepartment. examples, Puno,indigenous taxpayers an paid 4.7 and a of average pesos in tribute, each tributary represented family each castadelivered taxof4.4 pesos for a 4.17 persons;meanwhile, 3.73 Whencombined withJunin's different the dependents. slightly figures, for twoprovinces national ratios Indiansof5.05pesos, and yieldaverage 4.84family castasaveraged pesos and a family of4.15.To 4 members; size estimate Peru'stotal ethnic theseratios thenbe divided can populations, and multiplied the earmarked each ethnic for for against revenues group eachofPeru's sevendepartments table7).35 (see
35. These ratiosare not ideal national tributary ratiosin that we do not know how well and Puno representnationaldistributions. more precisemethodwould use detailed A Junin provincialdata, whichis lacking.Puno and Junin differ from 1827 totalsin thistestdue only to theiraveraging.For the use of tributary ratiosin population estimates,see Cook, Demographic Collapse,chap. 6. In his central sierrastudy, ContrerasfindstheaverageIndian family size to have been 4.8 persons and theaveragecasta family, He also foundhighlyvariable 3.8.
134
POPULATION
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
The results summarized in table 7 are consistentwith the direct 1827 population estimateforall of Peru, forits departmental totals,and forethniccomposition.Lima and Arequipa prove veryclose fitswhile all others(save Cuzco) demonstratea margin of difference only 5 to 10 of percent. Arequipa was a vital test of the new total because the direct census recordwas weakest in thefarsouth. At theleast, Peru'searlyfiscal and population data exhibitcompatibility. Overall, a tax quota yields a Peruvianpopulationof1,438,405, versusthe1827direct countof1,516,693. If one adds Amazonia (not included in the tributedocuments), the differencebetween the two estimatesis a mere 1.3 percent,a gap explicable by Peru's tinyminoritiesof white landlords, urban artisans, and black slaves. In short,Peru's 1827 population was indeed about 1.5 million.
INDIAN
PERU
New insightsare also possible on the Indian population ofPeru in 1827 and beyond fromcombiningthese freshdata with a reworkingof older information. The point of departureis Kubler's The IndianCasteof Peru. This 1952 study still provides the best map into the murkylandscapes ofethnicand social change in republicanPeru. By adoptingthetax collectors' social definition "indio"and "casta," of (somewhatcontroversial) Kubler discovered that Indian majoritiesactually increased throughout much of the nineteenth century,the only era in Andean historythat halted, if not reversed, culturaland demographicmestizaje. This phenomenon is the root cause of contemporary Peru's extraordinary indigenous presence. Much qualitativeevidence now supportsthisview,forthe earlynineteenthcenturyrepresentsa period when dominantwhite societywas weakened by the stresses of economic decay,politicalchaos, and uncertainties the colonial transition. of institutional Accordingto Kubler, in 1795 Indians comprised 57.6 percent of colonial population and then between increased to 59.3 percentof the new nation in thebroad interval 1826 and 1854. Theirnumbersbegan to declineto 54.8 percentin 1876 and to some 40 percent by the mid-twentieth Kubler's disaggrecentury.36 gated regional evidence and analysis offereven richer insights. The
tributerates. See Carlos Contreras,"Estado republicano y tributosindigenas en la sierra 1989):9-44. centralen la postindependencia,"Hist6rica no. 1 (July 13, 36. For provincialanalysis, see Kubler,Indian Caste ofPeru, tt. 2-3, 9, and all maps. A major dilemma in all such analysis is how "Indians" were defined. By the few indications criteria(inconsistently managed by mayknown, early censuses used colonial-adscriptive In was ors, caciques, priests, and tax-collectors). the 1876 survey,self-identification pracwere also instructed make "delicate"ad-hocdecisionsby sightor links ticed,but surveyors to was of parentage. See Diaz, Censo generalde 1876, 25. Nowhere, unfortunately, language data collected,a major indicatorofIndian life-style.
135
Review LatinAmerican Research consistency and veracitywith which the census takers defined and counted "Indians" is neverthelessalways open to question. The present study supports Kubler's findings,with some minor Table8 containsrevised 1827Indian populations and majorqualifications. provinces, by province, based on the new census data for thirty-three combinedwith some of Kubler's earliestrepublicanarchivalregisters.Of Peru's total 1.5 million population, 61.6 percent (934,816) were deemed Indians. This proportionslightlyexceeds Kubler's estimateof 59.3 perfrom1826 to 1854 (also shown by province),and centforthelong interval wider population base (all fifty-seven it is calculated on a significantly Province by province, fourteen provinces ratherthan only forty-three). zones display Indian compositionsthatdiffer 5 percentor more from by Kubler'sset,whilethreeothersreveal new data wherenone existedbefore Half of these revised (all are marked for interestedethnohistorians).37 region,however.Only Chancay, provinceswere confinedto Peru'scentral degree, and Abancay,Arica, and Parinacochas divergeto any significant The only the last shows any real shiftfromIndian to mestizo majority. basic profile, increasingIndian poputhen,is much likeKubler's: slightly lations near Lima and in the southern sierra, and modest mestizo advances in parts of Junin,La Libertad, and the hinterlandsof Arequipa. basicallyunderscores Kubler's Thus as disaggregates, new information the conclusions at the regional level, where his most telling ethnic comparisons emerge. This coincidence is not surprising,given the factthat both estimatesare based on the same type ofearlyfiscalsurveys. One notablerevisionis theprecisedate ofthenew 1827 calculation. Before the advent of independence, Peru's "Indianization" was already pronouncedor had grownmoreintense.This date should replaceKubler's vague use of the amalgam period of 1826-1854,which suggested Indian recuperationas an early republican ratherthan a late-colonialphenomenon. In part, this trendmust have reflected heightenedsense, and the of theenforcement, caste hierarchy duringthelate colonialregime,particof ularly in the aftermath the Tuipac Amaru revolt. Yet otherevidence points to real Indian demographicbuoyancy,such as the larger Indian a to familytypical of the 1820s.38Again, it is difficult attribute demothe graphicblack legend to the eve of colonialism. More important, key
In 37 Precisecomparisonsamong data in mytable 8 are difficult. severalcases (especially Cuzco and Ayacucho), republican boundary shiftsappear to be a factorin contrastwith Kubler.Two provincesshow unusual Indian majoritiesdue to conservative interpolations of totalpopulation. to zones wherechange seemed to occurbetween 1826 38. Kublermakes one attempt refine and 1854 (see maps 11-12). For late-colonialconditions affecting Indians, see JohnFisher, and in Government Society ColonialPeru (London: AthlonePress, 1970), esp. chaps. 4 and 6. For a revised (and less drastic)view ofthe demographicimpactoftheTuipacAmaru war,see Pacifico,1977), 123-29.
de rural a de del Magnus Morner, Perfil la sociedad delCuzco fines la colonia (Lima:Universidad
136
POPULATION
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
TA B L E 8 Peruvian IndianPopulations, Revised according 1827Figures to Indians in 1827 9,690 10,791 12,368 10,243 16,140 10,981 617 4,754 75,584 19,380e 37,854 9,048 7,121 11,321 25,409 6,387 15,069 131,589 21,787 30,943 22,333 18,762 1,986 4,164 10,275 20,000 7,476 137,726 41,072 35,381 17,588 49,296 45,513 188,850 18,720 Percentage Percentage perKubler Percentage in 1827 (1826/54) in 1793-95 16.6 57.7 88.8 73.7 97.5 89.5 38.5 26.4 47.0 52.3 62.6 62.3 54.1 61.3 51.2 25.5 34.0 50.0 51.9 57.5 51.7? 43.6 29.6 34.6 70.8 76.6 42.6 45.3 94.6 96.8 92.9 94.0 93.1 94.3 46.8 46.8 44.6 137 95.7 96.7 93.5 87.6a n.d.b 47.3/36.9e 57.5 n.d.d 43.6 29.6 57.8d 54.3c n.d.d 43.1 n.d.b 62.3 49.la 62.7 50.1 21.9 45.7c
57.la
Province Lima Cercado Chancay Canta Huarochiri Yauyos Santa Ica Junin Pasco Jauja Huainuco Huamalies Cajatambo Huaylas C.A./Huari ConchucosBajo
Caniete
Source K1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 K1830
14.9 70.2a 74.4a n.d.b 93.9 91.3 19.2a 67.6c
15.5 53.8 85.2 55.7 93.3 83.6 26.2 32.1 42.4 53.9 54.5 45.2 62.9 62.2 51.3 39.1 52.3 47.7 55.7 63.5 44.9 49.2 38.0 49.2 n.d. 34.3 50.1 n.d. n.d.
Departmentaltotals 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827
Departmentaltotals La Libertad/Amazonas 1827 Cajamarca (Chota) Piura 1827 1795 Lambayeque Huamachuco K1826 K1837 Jaen Tiujillo K1850 1827 Chachapoyas e Maynas Pataz K1835 Departmentaltotals Puno Azaingaro Huancane/Puno Carabaya Chucuito Lampa Cuzco Cercado 1827 1827 1827 1827 1827
Departmentaltotals K1840
Review Research LatinAmerican TABLE 8 (continued) Percentage Kubler Percentage Indians Percentageper in1827 Source in1827 (1826/54) in1793-95 23,033 9,530 12,278 9,760 30,654 11,812 17,776 15,614 16,952 33,101 199,230 10,758 16,819 23,942 10,011 7,551 16,981 14,899 8,385 20,345 129,691 10,545 5,929 19,343 1,249 12,011 17,272 5,797 72,146 934,816 87.7 63.8 94.0 80.5 85.3 90.2 95.4 71.0 89.0 91.7 79.5 59.2 83.0 76.4 61.3 73.7 74.3 65.2 70.7 (99) 73.0 52.2 11.7 (99) 11.7 58.1 56.9 63.2 45.0 61.6 86.1 63.4 93.3 80.7 63.2c 88.0 72.2c 71.0 89.0 94.0 82.0 55.8 86.6 74.3 72.9 89.0 70.6 92.0 71.8 83.1 75.3 78.9 74_83e 52.9 80.3 80.8 62.1 41.6 89.5 60.5 69.6 68.5 15.7 85.4 12.4 59.6 61.1 68.2 48.7 61.3
Province
1827 Quispicanchi 1827 Urubamba 1827 Paucartambo 1827 Paruro 1827 Abancay 1827 Calcay Lares 1832 Aymaraes K1830 Cotabambas Chumbivilcas K1830 1832 Tinta (Canas) totals Departmental Ayacucho K1830 Huamanga 1827 Huancavelica 1827 Parinacochas 1795 Cangallo 1827 Lucanas 1795 Huanta K1836 Andahuaylas 1795 Castrovirreyna K1830 Tayacaja totals Departmental Arequipa 1827 Arica(Tacna) 1895 Cercado K1843 Caylloma 1795 Camana 1795 Condesuyos 1795 Moquegua K1840 Tarapaca totals Departmental for Totals Peru
79.4a n.d.b,c 65.2 95.9c,d 76.8c,d
n.d.b,c
92.3c 79.4 44.8a
62.0a n.d.d 89.9d n.d.d n.d.d n.d.d 60.2 59.3
in denotes estimates based on theregister or Sources:See discussion text. Kubler's K/year other statistics 1827 of were censusofindicated aloneindicates census.AllIndian year; year as and all calculated a percentage 1827 of by (by populations province, department, for Peru) oftable 4. of or from Kubler's estimates. aDivergence 5 percent more b1827 censusprovides data. new or data. from cPossible divergence distortion unreliable or of difficult toboundary due population. changes interpolationstotal dComparison or data. incomplete, interpolated eUncertain, 138
POPULATION
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
analyticalquestion deepens as to when the tide actuallyturned toward modern mestizaje in the republic. The hiatus in data is now the halfcentury between 1827 and 1876-or beyond. A farmoreseriousdiscrepancyconcernsKubler'spresentation and interpretation national acculturation of trends.Table 9 presentsrevisions of theoverallproportionof Indians in thePeruvianpopulation from1795 through1940. Kubler's study actually omits fourteenprovinces-those thatwere lacking early republican archival data forlong-term comparisons-and thusit surprisingly coversonly a fraction Peru's population. of AlthoughKubler noted this fact,he did not warn scholarsof its possibly The most serious omission is the entiredepartmentof effect. distorting Puno, Peru's most heavilyIndian zone (in 1827, more than 94 percentof its 200,250 inhabitantsclaimed Indian status). Indeed, for1795, Kubler's studyconsiders only 68 percentof Peru's totalpopulation; forthe initial republic,less than 73 percent;for1876, 65 percent;and 67 percentof the modern 1940 census. Other critics,working directlyfromlate-colonial parish records,have verifiedKubler's regional underestimates Indian of The new data for 1827 allow full comparisons over this critical centuryand a half.Using an Indian proportionof94 percentforPuno in 1795 (150,155Indians), thenew 1827 figures-and theethnicbreakdowns published in the censuses of 1795, 1876, and 1940-yield new aggregate trendsthatdiffer Kubler'spartialones. In 1795Peru was 61.3 notablyfrom percentIndian; in 1827, 61.6 percent; in 1876, 57.9percent; and in 1940, This calculation calls into question both the notion of a 46.0 percent.40 late-colonialIndian surge and a definitive startto modern mestizaje by 1876. Settingaside more intricate questions of shiftswithinand among provinces,these aggregate proportionssuggest two trends. First,nineethnic stabilitywas striking, the great conteenth-century particularly between the 1790s and 1830s, when Indian groups remained 62 tinuity
39. Kubler should have clarified thisdefectby showing totaltabulationsof the threecensuses used (tt.4, 8, and 9). He followsthisapproach onlyforthe1795 census, theone closest to his own estimate.Also underscoringethnicdata flaws are the undercountsof the 1790s Ainercited in Sanchez-Albornoz,Populationz Latinz of suggested by theVollmer parish study, of ica, 110; and Browningand Robinson, "Origin and Comparability PeruvianData," 28-30. Indian statistics (with some errorreplication),see Thomas M. For discussions of long-term of Davies, IndianIntegration Peru (Lincoln: University Nebraska Press, 1970), 3. He sugin gests slow but genuine mestizaje by 1876. See also Magnus Mbrner,TheAndeanPast: Land, and Press, 1985),207-9. Societies, Conflicts (New York:Columbia University 40. Puno statistics from Prensa Peruana, Dec. 1828,16 Feb. 1829,and Telegrafo, 27 Dec. 27 17, againstthe156,000totalofthe1790s. The conceptof 1828,3 Jan.1829.Proportionsmultiplied "Indian" (which was never "racial") had become nebulous by the1940 census because ithad lost its older fiscalor adscriptivefunction.For a critiqueon thispoint, see JohnRowe, "The of Reviezv no. 2 (1947): 37, Distribution Indians and Indian Languages in Peru," Geographic 202-15.
populations.39
139
Review LatinAmerican Research Revisions Totals, 1795-1940 TABL E 9 Indian PopulationPeru, of of Population Covered 850,980 1,100,150 1,776,708 4,194,278 1,076,122 1,238,322 1,516,693 2,699,106 6,207,967 National Coverage (%) 79.la 68.7b 72.5c 65.8d 67.6e 86.9f 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Number of Indians 490,515 651,993 972,919 1,758,541 608,902 759,057 934,816 1,562,910 2,856,000 Indian Percentage 57.6 59.3 54.8 41.9 56.6 61.3 61.6 57.9 46.0
Year, Source Kubler 1795, Kubler 1826-1854, Kubler 1876, Kubler 1940, official 1795, 1795, revised 1827, tables 8 4, 1876census 1940census
Indian Sources: Caste Peru, 9, 8, 4; table ofthisarticle; tt. 8 Censo Kubler, of nacional de Peru, total 1940; revised 1795 from addition PunoandJaen of (162,200 population; 150,155 Indians). a79.1 percent the1795official of census. b68.7 of percent therevised 1795census. of c72.5 percent the1827 figures table (see 4). d65.8 of percent the1876census. e67.6percent the1940census. of f86.9 of 1795 census. percent therevised
percentof the Peruvian population. It is now inappropriateto speak of a global advance of Indian populations, although in some localities such increases did occur. That effect was misconstruedby undercounting the late-colonialIndian population by 4 percent. Similarly, is difficult it to speak ofa significantly advancingmestizajeby 1876,given thattheIndian proportionnationwidehad decreased by merely3.7 percent.Incomplete data exaggeratedthat decline. Indeed, the decrease probably lies in the marginof errorof the census. It shrinksby anotherpercentage point if one considers the impactof some 90,000 Chinese coolies broughtto Peru if of by 1876. And speaking hypothetically, one were to measure theeffect the reputed 300,000 Indian victimsof the 1850s epidemics, Peru's Indian at population would have held firm precisely62 percent.In short,priorto the War of the Pacific,historians can attributeno rise in mestizaje to social and culturalchanges. strictly None of these observations,however,deny Kubler's core insight: thatin macrohistorical terms,the nineteenthcenturyremains the great recordofEuropean encroachment and on exceptionto a half-millennium assimilationof Indian communities.In fact,the present analysis greatly 140
POPULATION
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
strengthens thatconclusion, along with its compellinghistoricaland anthropological implications.41

PERIODIZATION AND SOCIAL CHANGE
Some of these implicationsmust be broached, along with their relation historical to periodization. The mostobvious issue is theessentially of social, even politicaldefinition indio.No biological (much less "racial") scheme can account forthese overarching patternsof Indian resurgence, persistence, and decline in Andean society.Clearly,it remains vital to explore the specific changes in epidemiology,fertility, and mortality, in sexuality thenineteenth-century sierraas well as anycultural ecologor ical influences underlyingthem. Until such studies are made, further analyses of demographictrends,includingthisone, remaintentative.42 Second, historians must sort out the multiplicity social, ecoof nomic, and politicalfactorsthat bolstered or weakened the integrity of Indian identity and institutions. thisregard,a broad distinction be In can drawnbetween colonial modes ofIndianness and mestizajeversus "modern mestizaje," forwant of a betterterm.Put simply,duringthe colonial era,theSpanish stateplayed a majorrolein upholdinga dual caste society throughitsjudicial, social, and fiscalimperatives, even ifreality was a lot messier.The republican state withdrewfromthe business of regulating caste categories, and a host of impersonal forces-the market,resource pressures, liberal ideology,and class-slowly began to work on Indian attitudes, and social structures.43 lifestyles, Thus the nineteenthcentury is notable not only as a break fromthe centuries-olderosion of Indian
41. Kubler himselfstressesthesocial definition Indian statusover thebiologicaldefiniof tion and (less convincingly) stiffened a informal caste hierarchy after independence. Partof this paradox-that Indians stabilized in the absence of strict caste definition the state-is by explained by elementsofchoice explored subsequently. 42. Forfragments local demographicand family of a data, see "Poblaci6n del Perui lo largo de un siglo," pt. 3, "Estadisticas vitales,"95-118; and for1876-1940,"Factoresdeterminantes del crecimiento la poblaci6n," Informe de del demogrdfico Peru. The sole detailed studies of and birthrates, morbidity, family concernLima and are foundin ChristineHunefeldt's1984 manuscript,"Esclavitud urbana y vida familiar un contextomultietnico: en Lima, primera mitaddel siglo 19"; forthe1830s, see Mario CArdenasAyapoma, "Demografiadel pueblo de Santiago de 'Cercado,"' RevistadelArchivoGeneral la Naci6n8 (1985):79-111. de 43. The social realityof caste delineation was always more complex than Spanish legal norms. For an evaluation, see HerbertS. Klein, "The State and the Labor Marketin Rural Bolivia in theColonial and EarlyRepublicanPeriods," in Essaysin thePolitical, Economic, and Social HistoryofColonialLatinAmerica,edited by Karen Spalding (Newark: University of Delaware, 1982), 95-106; on social realities,see Oscar Cornblit,"Society and Rebellion in Eighteenth-Century Peru and Bolivia," in St. Antony'sPapers,edited by R. Carr, vol. 22 (1970):9-44. As with Andean demographichistory, most trenchant the work on historical definition Indian status analyzes the conquest era. See Steve Stern,Peru'sIndianPeoples of and theChallenge SpanishConquest:Huamangato 1640 (Madison: University Wisconsin of of Press, 1982).
141

societybut as an interregnum shiftto new concealing the little-studied modes ofethnicassimilation. Third,forvaried social contexts, historiansand othershave begun to discern the power relationsthat contribute the marked fluidity to of Indian status. For example, when specific advantages accrue to being Indian (say,protection fromrapacious landlords or consolidationof land and labor rights),peasants may voluntarily embrace it. Such self-styled Indianness is a hallmark of peasant politics. Alternatively, conscious adoption of mestizo traitshas been so ubiquitous in the Andes thatan entirevocabulary-that ofthecholo-has enveloped thetransitional social type. At the local level, these dynamics reveal themselveseven in the ethnicidentifications adopted withintheworkforceof a particular estate or withintheclass structure a village community. thebroadestlevel, of At traditionalIndian society tends to flourishwhen Europeanized groups are weakened, economicallyand socially,and to recede duringperiods of expansion by whitesocietyand its allies.44Typically, thesepretensionsof dominantsocietyhave swelled duringphases of commercial capitalist or dynamism,against thepretensionsofa largely"precapitalist" peasantry. if Ethnicity, notgoverned,is relatedin theAndes to modes ofproduction. Such generalizationsdo not even consider pathbreaking approaches to theentrenched Andean ideologyofthehighlandpeasantry, whichadd yet anotheractivedimensionto complexunderstandings Indian status.45 of While the new quantifications are helpful,littlecan be said yet about thetiming and causes ofmodernmestizajein Peru. These issues are hobbled by the dearth of caste census data between 1827 and 1876 and between 1876 and 1940 and by the scant state of researchon the nine44. See especiallyJuanMartinezAlier, huacchilleros Peru(Lima: Instituto Estudios Los del de Peruanos, 1973); Geoffrey Bertram,"New Thinkingon thePeruvianHighland Peasantry," Pacific Viewpoint no. 2 (Sept. 1974):89-111; Carlos Samaniego, "Peasant Movementsat 15, theTurnof the Centuryand theRise of theIndependentFarmer," PeasantCooperation in and Capitalist Expansion Central in Peru,edited by Norman Long and BryanR. Roberts(Austin: University Texas Press, 1978),45-71; see also aspects ofPablo Macera, "Feudalismo coloof nial americano:el caso de las haciendas peruanas," in Trabajos Historia de 3:139-228. See the generaloverviewofsocial factors Erwin Grieshaber, in "Hacienda-Indian Community Relations and Indian Acculturation: Historiographic An Essay," LARR 14, no. 3 (1979):107-28. The finest empirical workdemonstrates such class-ethnic dynamicsin predominantly mestizo regions: see FlorenciaE. Mallon, The Defense Community Peru'sCentral of in Highlands:Peasant Struggle Capitalist and Transition, 1860-1940 (Princeton, N.J.:Princeton University Press, 1983); and Brooke Larson, Colonialism and AgrarianTransformationBolivia: Cochabamba, in 1550-1900 (Princeton, N.J.:PrincetonUniversity Press, 1988). 45. See Alberto Flores Galindo, Buscandoun inca: identidad utopiaen los Andes (Lima: y Institutode Apoyo Agrario,1987); or his synopticEuropay el pais de los incas(Lima: IAA, 1986). See also Steve J.Stern, "The StruggleforSolidarity:Class, Culture,and Community in Highland Indian America,"RadicalHistory Review (1983):21-45,or theessays in Stern's 27 edited collectionResistance, Rebellion, Consciousness theAndeanPeasantWorld: and in 18thto 20th Centuries (Madison: University Wisconsin Press, 1987), especially Stern'sopening of chapter.See also La participacion indigena los mercados en surandinos: estrategias reproduccion y social,siglosxvia xx, edited by Olivia Harriset al. (La Paz: CERES, 1987).
142
POPULATION
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
teenth-century indigenous community. Overall, however,the foregoing analysis suggests two points. First,Peru's criollization priorto 1876 was nascent and belated, reflecting "ecological" (global) conditionsas much as local ones. In other words, the remarkable regional demographic stabilityevident beyond the 1850s reinforcedcolonial norms of ethnic identity fostering regional societies in which change had to occur. by the Second, in theabsence ofchange in "ancien regime"demographicbehavior,historiansshould focus on thesocial and politicalelementsof Indianmestizo status.46 Any pictureof global stasis, however,must not conceal in oftendeep-seated and subtle republican transformations the ways of Indian life. For the early republic,two specificperiodizationsand views currently dominatethinking about social change and theIndian community. The now traditional view holds thatIndians suffered immediatethreats withrepublicanism:from 1820s abolitionofpaternalistic caste distincthe tions, the liberalmid-1820sBolivarianland decrees (to privatizecommunityland use), and the suppression of traditional Indian leadership.All this legal change was allegedly followedby a wave of expropriations by ambitious white and rising mestizo landlords, the benefactorsof landdispensing caudillos. At least one historianattempted perilouslyto correlate this "neocolonialism" with the social map of nineteenth-century ethnicity.In the newest neo-Marxist formulation,the initial republic witnessed the rapid consolidation of local ruling classes ("feudal" or timewith politicalautonomyto exerttheir otherwise),armed forthe first own solutionsto the "Indian problem."47 This view is clearlymistaken,as shown by Indian persistencefarinto the republic. Historiansmighthave suspected this realityalready because Peru rapidly rescinded its initial liberalproclamationsand restoredcolonialfiscal-caste categoriesuntilthe mid-1850s,at least. Nor does genuine evidence existof aggressivemoves against Indian propertyand labor by Peru's economicallyand politically in beleaguered rulingcliques, particularly the sierra. Even on theirown ideals failed. More than paper decrees faulty terms,liberalintegrationist of "Piruvianization"were needed to cajole or coerce Indians into new lives.
46. A simpler(but unsubstantiated)thirdinference thatglobal stasis was maintainedby is higherIndian birthrates thatevenlycompensated historically consistentlosses throughmigration and mestizaje.The pioneering social approachappeared in Nicolas Sanchez-Albornoz, Indiosy tributos el AltoPeru(Lima: Instituto Estudios Peruanos, 1978). en de 47. Forexamples, see JeanPiel, "The Place of thePeasantryin the National LifeofPeru in the NineteenthCentury,"Past and Present (Feb. 1970):108-33; Davies, IndianIntegration, 46 capitalista (Lima: chap. 2; ErnestoYepes del Castillo, Peru, 1820-1920: un siglodel desarrollo IEP, 1973),chaps. 1-2; and Henri Favre, "El mundo andino en tiempos de Bolivar:los Asto entre1780y 1830," RevistadelMuseo Nacional47 (1983-1985):259-71.For thestrainedanalysis ofKubler'smapping, see JeanPiel, Capitalisme agraire Pe'ou (Paris: Anthropos,1975), au 1:290-316 and 312-13.
143
Review Latin American Research

As an alternative, otherhistoriansnow suggest strongcontinuities for withcolonial caste society.Primarily fiscalreasons (continuing depenthe dence on nativetribute), feeblenationalstatesoftheAndes continued to uphold Indian corporaterights,particularly access to protectedcommunitylands. Tributes,redubbed contribuciones, supplied more than a thirdof government funds. This "reciprocalpact" was reinforced the at regionallevel by gamonales, caudillos, and priestswithvested interests or with the sierranpopulace. In Peru, the turning even culturalaffinities abolition of tributein 1855, point in this balance came with the official which accordingto some quicklyturnedinto renewed liberaland landed One virtueof this explanation,which assaults on Indian prerogatives.48 role has been developed highlyfortheBolivian experience,is thevibrant restoredto Indian communities, who seized opportunitiesto asserttheir interestsand culture. It is also more consistentwith population trends, scatteredimpressionsofundisturbedIndian lifestyles intotherepublate lic, and other social evidence-such as the surprisinghalf-century of peasant quietism in the Andes. Not one major rebellion rocked Peru between 1815 and thelate 1860s.49 Still, this tributary-state model, and its explanationof ethnic staremains weak forthe Peruvian case. Above all, it shares with the bility, "liberal-rape"school the assumption that republican "states" (or their grass-rootssurrogates) were coherentor strongenough to affect social change. Yetforall practical purposes, governanceofthePeruviancountryside evaporated until at least the 1860s. A tributary-state model narrows and power to fiscalrelationsand generalizes complexissues of ethnicity In from fairlyspecial Bolivian circumstances.50 most of Lower Peru,
48. For a Bolivianmodel, see Tristan en Platt,Estadoboliviano aylluandino:tierra tributo y y de el norte Potosi(Lima: Instituto Estudios Peruanos, 1982); and Sanchez-Albornoz,Indios de y tributos, chap. 5. For Ecuador, see Andres Guerrero,"Curagas y tenientespoliticos:la ley de la costumbrey la ley del estado (Otavalo, 1830-1875),"Revista Andina7, no. 2 (Dec. 1989): 321-63, or MarthaMoscoso C., "Comunidad, autoridadindigenay poder republicano,"481501. For Peru, two recent studies are Maria Isabel Remy,"La sociedad local al inicio de la Andina6, no. 2 (Dec. 1988):451-84;and Glave, "Demorepublica:Cuzco, 1824-1850,"Revista grafiay conflictosocial," 24-31. For the prevailingview of tributeabolition, see Macera, "Plantaciones azucareras," 191-97 49. For an overviewthatincludes theAndean pattern, JohnH. Coatsworth,"Patterns see ofRuralRebellionin LatinAmerica:Mexico in Comparative Perspective,"Riot,Rebellion, and Revolution: RuralSocialConflict Mexico,edited by Friedrich in Katz (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1988),21-64; and Piel, "Place ofthePeasantry." 50. As Platt'sworkdemonstrates, Bolivian"tributary" the stateenveloped a fairly coherent mercantilist economy of povertythatinvolvedlocal graintrades,protectionism, monetary policy,and land policy.No such patternis evident forPeru, where agrarianprotectionism revolvedaround coastal elites. See Paul Gootenberg,Between Silverand Guano: Commercial Policy theStatein Postindependence (Princeton, and Peru N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1989), chap. 3. Even forBolivia, such sociopoliticalcircumstances were confinedto thePotosiarea. For interesting regional comparisons, see Larson, Colonialism and AgrarianTransformation, chap. 9.
144
POPULATION
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
corporatelandholding and Indian authorities (caciques, curacas, alcaldes, and varayocs) were too disruptedby 1821 to support thiskind of indirect rule. Nor did forced tributary paymentsbring tangiblebenefits,as attestedby the irregular course ofPeru's Indian "policy."Emergingstudies suggest instead idiosyncratic adjustmentsat the community level (as in Cuzco and Puno), or by the 1840s, an activepeasant shift towardcheaper "casta" status,as typified theemergingassociativecommunities the by of Mantaro Basin.51By the late 1840s, the sudden affluence the Peruvian of treasuryfromguano all but eclipsed these tributary vestiges. Yet the resulting national abolitionofthe contribucion indigenas de representedno visiblewatershedin Indian-white relations. A thirdinterpretation, based on recentsocial history theperiod, of mightintegrate ethnictrendswiththeregion'sbroadestcurrents social of change. Specifically, this periodization mightlink delayed mestizaje to Peru's haltingpatternsof creole state-building and capitalism.In a longtermcomparative sense, thePeruvianpattern reflected largerpolitical the and economicmarginalization theAndes by theBourbonera, tempered of with dynamicIndian responses. Three discerniblestages emergehere: a prolonged post-independence stalemate; limited change between 1860 and 1880, and rapid rural transformations afterthe War of the Pacific. Such a scheme is only suggestive. Periodization must abstractfroma perplexingarrayof obscured local detail,and here ithighlights initial the developmentsbetween 1820 and 1860. During the firsthalf-century republican rule in Peru, neither of liberal decrees nor tributary status significantly affected Indian communities. Naturally isolated and shelteredby the breakdown in national politics, communications,and marketsduring the caudillo era, indigenous communitieswere left mainly to themselves. No army of local officials enteredtheir was hamlets,and thelocal hacendado reduced to first among equals. Thus Indians were freedfromthe traditional increas(or ingly intrusive)oppressions of the colonial regime, and enjoyed, if by default,a penurious respitefromthe marketpressures of emergingcapitalism.During thisperiod, manyquietlyresistedtheencroachments and appeals of Hispanic society,and few stopped or cared to stop being "Indians." Tales abound of mistis(provincialwhites) adopting Quechua ways, of puna settlements rebuildingthemselves.This trendwas, above all, a voluntaristic movement:recentstudies discernfew social blocks to This concertedwithdrawal in peasant mobility. was reflected thehopeless
51. See especiallyContreras, "Estado republicano tributo y indigena,' and Christine Hunefeldt,"Poder y contribuciones:Puno, 1825-1845," RevistaAndina7, no. 2 (Dec. 1989):367409. See also thealreadycited worksby Glave and Remyon Cuzco. I do notmean to downplay the important insightsintolocal power and ethnicarrangements arisingfrom thisnew research.
145
American Research Review Latin

of efforts landed elites, highland and coastal, to recruitnative labor by the the forceor monetaryincentives.Indeed, throughout century, rootsof creole Peru's vexing "falta de brazos" problem were more social than thatruralpopulationswere expandingbriskly.52 quantitative, giventhefact Broad economicconditionsalso fosteredIndian stabilization.One indigenous peoAlmost by definition, of themwas widespread poverty. ples are poorerthan others(at least in monetaryterms);in fact,theywere 53Their ranks were to swell as on average twice as poor in the 1820s. in markets receded and fragmented thefollowing forty years.Recourseto hacienda expansion,would forestalling subsistencestrategies, apartfrom of also have temperedtheinternaldifferentiation indigenous groups. Yet withdrawalof communitieswere abunwhat allowed the self-sufficient dant physical resources resultingfrompersistinglow man-land ratiosin much oftheAndes. This advantage has been shown, forexample,even in vacias the relativelypopulated centralhighlands, where surplus tierras cushioned conflict between estates and villagers formuch of the ninea teenth century.In distant puna pastoral lands and tropicalfrontiers, In valve emerged.54 general,estimatesofIndian landholdveritable safety 40 ings run high. Forexample,one observerguessed thatroughly percent of all Indians possessed land in the mid-1840s.In the altiplanosofPuno, native peasants controlledthe "majority"of pastures and livestockwell beyond the 1850s. In short,such were the extensiveconditionsunderlying old-style demographic growth in Peru, which for varied reasons revivalofAndean ways. spelled an efficient A regionalsurveyreveals thatmanyearlyeconomicdevelopments and cultures,inversely thedecay of to positivelyenhanced Indian circuits core Hispanic mining, market, and urban pursuits. In some extreme the cases, such as the southernColca Valley, colonial elitemistisocietyof
52. This period has been the least studied. The only regional work is Jacobsen'shighly detailedstudyofAzangaro, althoughimportant researchon communities now in progress is by Maria Isabel Remy,Marcela Calisto, ChristineHunefeldt,and Cecilia Mendez. For the better-known Bolivian case, see Erwin Grieshaber, "Survival of Indian Communities in of Nineteenth-Century Bolivia," Ph.D. diss., University North Carolina, Chapel Hill, 1977. For a social analysis of the elite's labor shortage, see Macera, "Plantaciones azucareras," 150-98; and a contrasting "resistance"view in Mallon, Defense Community, of chap. 2. 53. Recallthaton thenationallevel,Indians earned a taxableincomeof22.8 pesos annually versus thecasta figure 45.5, as calculated from 1827estadisticas. of the Magnus Mornerinterprets the Kubler data as the simple concomitant ruralpovertyand marginalization.See of RaceMixture theHistory LatinAmerica in Morner, of (Boston,Mass.: Little, Brown,1967),108. DESCO, 1987), chap. 3; JeanPiel, "Pastoreo andino y espejismos de eternidadtel7rica: la prueba en contrario la historiademogrMfica Espinar (Cusco) de 1689a 1940,"Revista de de del Museo Nacional 47 (1983-1985):280-84; Jacobsen,"Landtenure and Society in AzAngaro," 255; and JuanBustamante'sestimateof landholding,cited in Macera, "Plantaciones azucaIndian frontier thetropicalvalleyofChanchamayo,where reras,"277.The mostdramatic was See S. Varese,La sal untilthe1860s, Campa Indians were actively expellingSpanish settlers. de los cerros (Lima: Retablo de Papel, 1973).
54. See NelsonManrique, Mercado interno regi6n: sierra y la central, 1820-1930 (Lima:
146
POPULATION
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
hacendados and minerspractically vanished withindependence. Indians took to hawking their alpaca wool directlyto Arequipan merchants. Ayacucho suffered long-term the collapse of white commercialactivities, save for coca production,with its obvious dependence on the peasant economy.This trendhelped sparka dramatic resurgenceofancientethnic as politicsand autonomy, played out in theIquichana revolt the1820s.55 in Further south, historiansnow emphasize how the opening stage of the new wool export trades, which saw particularly high prices for native alpaca, was easily amenable to indigenous herding communities,who bypassed Hispanic intermediaries revived regional fairs.Recent studat ies of Cuzco followingindependence (or the Mancha India at large) belie notions of a move toward regional latifundismo.The picture at midcenturyof provinceslike Quispicanchi is instead one of villages sharing space with sundry smallholdergroups, who enjoyed littleedge in technology or resources. A particularlyrich study of Espinar (Canas), an Indian herdingzone, reveals how natives"reconquered" overwhelmingly theirpunas while cleverlyexploiting emerging wool markets in their "autonmist strategy." This area was one of dramaticlong-termIndian population growthand a magnet of flight fromnearbyhaciendas.56The town of Cuzco, a former bastion of Spanish control,continuedto shrink in size and influencethroughout nineteenthcentury.In short,Cuzthe quenlo Indianness did not arise fromenforcedisolationby monopolistic gamonales. In thecentralsierra,wheretheeminently Hispanic activity silver of miningenjoyed a comebackin thepost-independenceyears,theCerro de Pasco mines quickly came to depend on willing part-timeIndian misiglosxvi-xx(Lima: DESCO, 1986),chap. 9; Cecilia Mendez's intriguing politicalstudy, "Los campesinos, la independencia y la iniciaci6nde la repudblica el Peru," FLASCO, Quito, en 1990; and Jaime Urrutia,"De las rutas,feriasy circuitos Huamanga," Allpanchis (1983): en 21
55. See NelsonManrique, Colonialismo y pobreza campesina: Caylloma el valledelColca, y
47-64.
56. See Karen Spalding, "Class Structuresin the SouthernPeruvian Highlands, 17501920," in Land and Powerin LatinAmerica,edited by Benjamin Orlove and Glynn Custred (New York: Holmes and Meier, 1980), 79-98; Nils Jacobsen,"Desarrollo econ6mico y relaciones de clase en el sur andino, 1790-1920:una replicaa Karen Spalding," Andlisis4 (MayAug. 1979):67-81; Maria Isabel Remy,"Gamonalismo: tierray poder local en el siglo xix cuzquenio,"B.A. thesis,UniversidadCat6lica del Peru, 1985); Magnus Morner,"La distribuci6n de ingresosen un distrito andino en los anios1830," Estudios Andinos13 (1977); Michael Gonzales, "Neo-colonialism and Indian Unrest in SouthernPeru, 1867-1898," Bulletin of LatinAmerican Research no. 1 (1987):5-6; and Jacobsen, 6, "Landtenureand Societyin Azangaro," chaps. 4-5. The most explicitand compellingstudyof Indian economic autonomyis Piel's "Pastoreo andino y historiademogrAfica Espinar"; foran account of a similarmide gratory withdrawal,see Henri Favre, "The Dynamics of Indian Peasant Societyand Migration to Coastal Plantationsin CentralPeru," in Land and Labourin LatinAmerica, edited by K. Duncan and I. Rutledge(Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1977),257-61. Favreis now explicitly researching"Indianization" processes in Huancavelica; see his researchreen portin Estadosy naciones losAndes,edited by J.P. Deler and Y. Saint-Geours(Lima: Institutode Estudios Peruanos, 1986),169.
147
Research American Review Latin

the grants.Significantly, miningindustryitselfhad to adjust production This arrangement was "articschedules to theneeds of agrarianrhythms. in ulation," not subordination or proletarianization, the words of one Aside from tribute historian.57 demands, Indian workersused theirearnings to bolstertheirexchange networksand elaboratefiestasystems. In mixed culturaland institutional this zone of extremely stocks,resurgent Indian tradecenterofHuanIndianness was pronounced; theflourishing cayo contrastedmarkedlywith the decaying colonial Hispanic town of Jauja. Population grew fastestoutside the hacienda, which housed less than one-tenthof the valley's inhabitants.Even in areas where small haciendas dominatedland tenure(such as northern groups of traditional Cajamarca, with few corporatevillages), recentresearchhas stressedthe impactof peasant alternatives. The nineteenth-century labor market was but a regional feudalmanor.Peasants competed in a numberof anything markets-the plantation coast, Amazonian tropics, and mines-or they invested in their own artisanal and agrarian pursuits.58Here a freer assimilationdeveloped towardmestizo status. This periodization and survey suggest a host of ethnographic questions on the internalmakeup and evolutionof therepublicanIndian "community,"about which so little is known. The sole true baseline study-from scattered locales on the eve of colonialism (1800-1830)presents these communitiesas radicallyvariegated amalgams of social and mestypes: traditionalIndians, Hispanicized caciques, yanaconas, tizos mixing in a messy cauldron of internal ethnic, class, and landrelated tensions. One historian has depicted them as "Indian only in to name," because contrary Spanish law, whiteshad injectedthemselves into the communities,exertingmountingcontrol.59 Did the subsequent relaxationof externalpressures allow formore cohesive community relaDid poverty tions, along with resistance to or expulsion of foreigners? and lapsed enforcement lead to a generallevelingofcolonialsocial categories? Particularly interesting here is the scant referencefornineteenthof versus forascenturyPeru to the ancient colonial dichotomy originario which still marked many Bolivian communities.A centuryearlier, tero, landless forasteros comprisedmore than a thirdofnativesin some zones,
57. See Contreras, Mineros campesinos los Andes,pt. 3; Contreras, en y "Estado republicano y tributo indigena," 19-26; and Manrique, Mercadointerno regi6n, y chap. 3 (based largelyon JoseMaria Arguedas's anthropological classic "Evoluci6n de las comunidadescampesinas"). Mallon makes valuable close comparisonsof Indian-styleand mestizo village structures in 58. Lewis Taylor, "Earninga Living in Huaygayoc, 1870-1900," in Miller,Region and Class in Peruvian History, 103-24. The northern highlands remainone of theleast studied areas of Peru. delPeruentre coloniay republica (Bonn: BonnerAmerikanische Studien, 1982); and Favre,"El mundo andino entre1780 y 1830."
of chaps. Defense Communities, 2-3.
59. See Christine Lucha la tierraprotesta Hunefeldt, por y indigena: comunidades las indigenas
148
POPULATION
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
such as Cuzco and Trujillo.Their continuingflightunderlay viceroyal Peru's tardystabilizationofIndian populations. Historiansknow thatthe republican state, at least, assumed a more homogenous view of Indianness. Were the formerforasterosinformally creating or blending into fixedvoluntarycommunities?If so, was this tendencya major cause of advancingIndianness? Around Canas, thisprocess appears to have been in progress,with or withoutofficial guidance; theproportionofforastero Indians grew rapidly afterindependence, at least until 1845, when recorded distinctionsend.60 At the otherend of the spectrum,did nearwhites take advantage of independence to leave mestizo roots behind, adding to themore dichotomousethnicstructure captured in nineteenthcenturycensuses? The murkyevidence suggests overall the consolidation of more "pseudo-Indian" villages, exemplifiedin the Mantaro region, where all sorts of peasants mimickedmany of the norms of cooperativelabor and resourcesofindigenous folk,whetherout ofnecessityor advantage. This in behavioris consistentwith Andean microeconomics, which reciprocal tasks (minkas)support rationalor efficient exploitationof extensiveresources, given traditional technologies.But it is not the same as propertied communalism,thaterroneous conception of Indianness vaunted by early indigenistas. One must stress that even in the most indigenous like Puno, littlecore agricultural land was actually communally zones, worked by the mid-nineteenth owned or unlike pastoral comcentury, mons. In most cases, one wonders whethercommunalism ever domifrom nated.61Ifnothingelse, this individualismsuggests possible effects and decliningbureaucratic earlyliberaldecrees props to corporateproperty rights once embedded in the colonial regime. At the same time, historianshave detected,even among integrated hacienda residents,an which evolved into a informal spread of horizontalties of "comunalidad,"
60. See especially Glave, "Demografia y conflictosocial," app. tables and 22-24. See 51-53, 60-64, and chap. 2; and Contreras,"Estado reSanchez-Albornoz,Indiosy tributos, were stillmade in Peru's indigena," 26, 33. Distinctionsamong forasteros publicano y tributo 1830 "Memoria de Hacienda"; subsequently,theyappear veryrarely. y chap. 3, 152-55; 61. For a descriptionoffeatures,see Manrique, Mercadointerno region, as a social model, see FlorenciaMallon, "Microeconomiay campesinado: hacienda, comuniecon6micos en el valle de Yanamarca,"Andlisis4 (1978); fordetailedanalydad y coyunturas land tenure,see Jacobsen,"Landtenureand Societyin Azangaro," sis oftypesofcommunity terratemayu:sociedades 675-92. For analysis ofhorizontalties, see Nelson Manrique, Yawar nientes 1879-1910 (Lima: DESCO, 1988),esp. chap. 4; and Carlos Contreras,"Merserranas, cado de tierras sociedad campesina: el valle del Mantaroen el siglo xix,"paper preparedfor y the meetingsofthe Latin AmericanStudies Association in Miami, 4-6 Dec. 1989, 20-23. On campesino en theseissues, themostusefuleconomicmodel is thatofDaniel Cotlear,Desarrollo de social en las comunidades la sierradel Peru y los Andes: cambiotecnol6gico transformaci6n unusual specificity de (Lima: Instituto Estudios Peruanos, 1989),chap. 2. This workexhibits relationshipsamong demographic,technological, about Andean land-use and the historical and institutional change.
149
Review Latin American Research

pervasive form of cultural resistance by the late nineteenth century. all Significantly, thesedevelopmentswere occurring duringthewaning or completeabsence oftraditional curacaleadership. Whateverthe case, it is clear that"Andean" behaviors and institutions were adapting in a radicallyconfused and unstable judicial context, which was neitherthe sanctioned "Indian Republic" communitarianism of colonial courtsnor the freeholdindividualismannounced on paper in was republicancommercialcodes. In some sense, the Indian community in developing, despite its evidentvibrancy, thatvulnerablesocial netherworld reserved formestizos in the colonial era. In short,study of nineshould prove ofutmostinterest ethnohisto teenth-century communities torians seeking patternsof autonomous Andean consciousness, during this long intervalbetween enforcedversions of community and the capitalisterosion ofhighland cultureduringthetwentieth century.62 Given this resilience, the second major phase-beginning with consolidationof a stable creolenationalstatein the 1850s-barely affected Peru's ruralstasis. Two broader structural factorsalso inhibitedchange. First,the state during the guano era remained highlylocalized around Lima, anchoredas itwas in theboomingcoastal economyofguano. Given thepeculiarfiscalwealth and autonomyitgenerated,no pressingpolitical need registered integrate to peasants or provincialelitesintowiderefforts at state-building.63 For example, regional elites appear to have been largelyignored in theirlocal struggleswith recalcitrant peasantries. For these reasons, Peru did not suffera revived liberal offensiveagainst Indianness, such as Bolivia experienced in the 1870s. The abolition of in or tribute the 1850s was not followedby positive institutional integrationist developments, and if anything,loosened ties further between white and Indian society.Second, thelocus of thecapitalistdevelopment thatdid emerge was mainlyconfinedto the new commercial plantations producingsugar,cotton,and wine on thecoast, a world apartfrom Peru's Indian hinterlands.The planters'massive recourseto an importedvariety of proletarians(coolies or uprooted workers) further to slowed efforts involveor induce flowsofnationallabor.
62. AlbertoFlores Galindo encapsulates the nineteenthcenturyas one of shrinking nationalconsciousness of the Andean peasant, more reason yetto examine such autonomous ruralpolitics,an importantelement of "lo andino." See Flores Galindo, "In Search of an Inca," in Stern, Resistance, Rebellion, and Consciousness, 207. See also EfrainKristal'sThe
(New York:PeterLang, 1987). This studypushes indigenismooriginsback to thisera but is consciouslysparse on social realities. 63. For fiscalanalysis of this limitednational scope, see Gootenberg,Between Silverand Guano,132-37.Fortheonlystudyofelite-state interactions outsideLima, see Mallon, Defense ofCommunity, chap. 2. On coastal planters and labor recruitment, JuanRolfEngelsen, see "Social Aspects ofAgricultural Expansion in Coastal Peru, 1825-1878,"Ph.D. diss., UniversityofCalifornia,Los Angeles, 1977.
Andes Viewed theCity:Literary Political and from Discourse theIndian Peru,1848-1930 on in
150
POPULATION
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
Nevertheless,thefirst tangiblesigns ofpost-colonialchange registered in the 1860s and 1870s. The pace of ruralmigrations quickened to Lima and a scattering lowland enterprises.Here and there,moribund of provincialpower holdersbegan to take more concertedinterest marin ketsand landholdings,as registered thesouth. In thissense, whites,or in those who mightpass as such, were unassimilatingfromthe folk,and withthisawakeningcame ad hoc and localized revivalsofpettylabor and racialist demands, such as "enganche."64 Strained traditionalbalances suggest the emergence of a more defensive Indianness, which in the extreme in expressed itself the "caste" explosion of Huancane in 1867.By 1876 a modestlysmallershare ofPeruvians regardedthemselvesas Indians, and regionaldemographicweightwas shifting away from Indian the south. But slowly,the social effects the guano era-the first of railroad stops, recovering commercialhaciendas, formalizedmarkets, Europeanized high culture,and its trickle new local officials-werepenetrating of profounder Peru. For the first time,economic trendswere enforcing the anti-Indianliberalismheralded in 1824, althoughtherestillwould be no PeruvianPorfiriato. By all recentaccounts,the climaxofpressureson Indian and rural communities had to wait untilafter wrenchingdisruptionsoftheWar the ofthePacific. Historiansmightponderwhythesocial and ethnicimpactof this second militarism(1879-1895) ran so much deeper than the first (1815-1845). Whatever the explanations (and there are many), by the new formsof regional developopening years of the twentieth century, ment,foreign investment, vigorouslyreconstituted provincialelites,and an operationalnationalstateall had combinedto promote rapidlyexpanding communications,government,markets,and schools. The groundwork had finally been laid fora capitalistPeru and forsuccessfulcreole time state-building.65 Massive land-grabs struckthe Andes forthe first since the centuryof conquest, most dramatically the south. Everyin withelitewealthand where,directcontrol overland became synonymous influence.Rebellions (and the ubiquitous daily signals of ruralconflict) erupted on a scale comparableonly withthoseof the1780s,includingthe reactive,millennarian"Incan" kind. There was no lack of oppression,
64. On elitemoves back to thehaciendas, see Jacobsen, "Landtenureand Societyin Azanpropiedad, podery garo," chap. 6. On local migrations,see Isabelle Lausent, Acos: pequeina economia mercado de (Valledel Chancay)(Lima: Instituto EstudiosPeruanos, 1983),chap. 3. de (Lima: Imp. On migration Lima, see AlfredoLeubel, El Peruen 1860 o sea anuarionacional to de Comercio, 1860), 266. It would be interesting know whethersuch social change folto lowed thecourse ofPeru'srailroadspriorto 1879, as was dramatically clearin Mexico. 65. This periodizationfollowsMallon, Defense Community, 2, supportedby virtually pt. of all the dozens of recentregional studies. On landed expansion, see Jacobsen,"Landtenure mayu.On social and Societyin Azangaro," chap. 6. On interior elites,see Manrique, Yawar aristoy reactions,see Manuel Burgaand AlbertoFlores Galindo, Apogeo crisisde la republica crdtica (Lima: RichayPeru, 1979),pt. 2.
151
Review American Research Latin

even state-sanctionedviolence, in these developments. On the land, a historicdemographicthresholdhad also been crossed: land, not labor, had become the scarce, valuable, and conflict-ridden resource. Peru's centuryand a half of uninterrupteddemographicrecoverywas definiand customsintetively eclipsingtheextensiveinstitutional technological Andean agriculture.66 gralto labor-short Mountingnumbersofpeasants, facedwithdiminishing and differindividual and entiatingresources fromwithin, had to make difficult Indians into mestizos choices. Capitalism was transforming community as well as ruralproletarians.In different settingsand different ways, the became overwhelming.67 disincentivesto maintainingIndian lifestyles the And while thePeruvianstatewas forcedto reenter business ofshoring up indigenous villages by the 1920s (much as under the colonial regime), thistimelittle could be done to quell thegrowthofmodernmestizaje. Withthe exceptionof the sixteenth centuryand the noble work of N. D. Cook, Peruvian sociodemographichistoryremains in its infancy. Historianscontinueto be hobbled by thelack ofmid-colonial, republican, and early twentieth-century censuses or by their major flaws. These problems may never be fullyrectified. This exercisehas focused on the gap from1790 to 1850 between colonialism and republic. As has been shown, the 1836 "census" never happened; however,Peru's unutilized 1827 fiscal surveys do make a comprehensivepopulation census. These data permita new estimateofpost-independencepopulation ofone and a halfmillionPeruvians, 62 percentofthemIndian. These verifiable aggregates yield stableand plausible demographicratesfortheera and open the refinement faulty of way to further figures. New information ethnic groups also underscores the contion social and regionalstructures. In nuitiesin republicanPeru'sfundamental the Indian majority particular, country's managed to maintaineven more and autonomythanpreviouslythought-throughout century. the stability This findingheightensour need to comprehendthe persistenceof "Indiof anness" duringthefirst half-century the republic,as well as thetiming and causes ofPeru's slow turntowardmodernmestizajeby thestartofthe A twentieth century. synthesisofrecentresearchshows thatbroad social forces-the halting, uneven movements of nineteenth-century creole and capitalism-worked on extensivedemographiccondistate-building
66. Cotlearis the most expliciton the timingof this demographic-economic shift and dissolution of older communitynorms. See Cotlear,Desarrollo campesino, 46-49. For a sharp inside view ofone experience,see Enrique Meyer,"Land Tenureand Communal Controlof Land in Laros, Yauyos,Peru," manuscript,1987. 67. After 1920, a massive anthropological(and indigenista)literature began to accumulate on the subject of mestizaje, althoughit contains surprisingly littlehistoricalanalysis. See "El Charles Walker, estudio del campesinado en las ciencias sociales peruanas: avances, limitaciones y nuevas perspectivas,"Allpanchis (1989):165-205. 33
152
POPULATION
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
Yet tionsto produce these ethniccontinuities. at the same time,thisview points to subtle and active changes in the ways of Indian life. But such observationsare mere guesses at what is certainly the largest and leasttrodtopic in modernAndean history.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BERTRAM, GEOFFREY
1974
"New Thinkingon the Peruvian Highland Peasantry."Pacific Viewpoint no. 2 15, (Sept.):89-111. "The Origin and Comparability PeruvianPopulation Data, 1776-1815."Bulletin of
BROWNING, DAVID, AND DAVID ROBINSON
1976
BURGA, MANUEL, AND ALBERTO FLORES GALINDO CARDENAS AYAPOMA, MARIO
the for American Studies (Nov.):19-37. 25 of Society Latin
1979 Apogeo crisis la republica de aristocrdtica. Richay Lima: y Peru.

1985 de "Demografiadel pueblo de Santiago de 'Cercado.'" RevistadelArchivoGeneral la Naci6n8 (1985):79-111. del 'Aspectos hist6ricos."Introductionto Informe Demogrdfico Peru, 1970, 3-18. Lima: Centro de Estudios de Poblaci6n y Desarrollo.
DE POBLACION Y DESARROLLO
CENTRO DE ESTUDIOS
1972
COATSWORTH, JOHN H.
1978 1988
tive." Riot, In and SocialConflict Mexico, in Rebellion, Revolution: Rural editedby

Friedrich Katz, 21-64. Princeton,N.J.:PrincetonUniversity Press.
CARLOS
"Obstacles to Economic Growth in Nineteenth-Century Mexico." American Historical Review83, no. 1 (Feb.):81-85. "Patternsof Rural Rebellion in Latin America: Mexico in ComparativePerspec-
CONTRERAS
en laboral economfa 1987 Mineros campesinos losAndes: y mercado y en campesina la sierra

1989 1989 central, sigloxix. Lima: Institutode Estudios Peruanos. "Estado republicano y tributosindigenas en la sierracentralen la postindependencia." Hist6rica no. 1 (July):9-44. 13, "Mercado de tierrasy sociedad campesina: el valle del Mantaro en el siglo xix." Paper prepared forthe meetingsof the Latin American Studies Association, 4-6 December.
COOK, NOBLE DAVID
1981
1981
A 1982 The Peopleof theColca Valley: Population Study. Colo.: WestviewBoulder,

Dellplain.
CORNBLIT, OSCAR
Demographic Collapse:IndianPeru, 1520-1620. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press. "Eighteenth-Century Population Change in Andean Peru: Parish of Yanque." In Studiesin SpanishAmerican edited by David Robinson,243-70. Population History, Boulder,Colo.: Westview.
1970
Peru and Bolivia." St. Antony's "Society and Rebellion in Eighteenth-Century Papers22 (1970):9-44.
COTLEAR, DANIEL
social 1989 Desarrollo en campesino losAndes:cambio tecnol6gico y transformaci6n en las

del comunidades la sierra Peru. Lima: Instituto Estudios Peruanos. de de IndianIntegration Peru. Lincoln: University Nebraska Press. in of 1974.
M.
DAVIES, THOMAS
1970
DIAZ, ALIDA
1974 El censo de RuralAndina, de general 1876en el Peru.Lima: Seminario Historia

1977 "Social Aspects of Agricultural Expansion in Coastal Peru, 1825-1878." Ph.D. of diss., University California,Los Angeles.
ENGELSEN, JUAN ROLF
153
Review Research Latin American

FAVRE, HENRI
"The Dynamics ofIndian Peasant Societyand Migrationto Coastal Plantationsin Central Peru." In Land and Labourin Latin America,edited by K. Duncan and I. Rutledge,257-61. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press. 1983- "El mundo andino en tiempos de Bolivar:los Asto entre1780 y 1830." Revistadel 1985 Museo Nacional47:259-71.
1977
FISHER, JOHN
and 1970 Government Society Colonial in Peru. London:Athlone.

Europay el pafsde los incas. Lima: Instituto Apoyo Agrario. de "In Search of an Inca." In STERN 1987, 193-210.
ALBERTO
FLORES GALINDO,
1986 1987
un 1987 Buscando inca:identidadutopfa losAndes. en Lima. y

GLASS, D., AND D. E. C. EVERSLEY, EDS.
1965
in Population History. London: E. Arnold. "Demografia y conflictosocial: historia de las comunidades campesinas en los Andes del sur." IEP Documento de Trabajo no. 23. Lima: Institutode Estudios Peruanos.
GLAVE, LUIS MIGUEL
1988
GONZALES
1987 1981
Latin American Research no. 1:5-6. 6,

PAUL
"Neo-colonialism and Indian Unrest in Southern Peru, 1867-1898." Bulletinof
MICHAEL
GOOTENBERG,
and 1989 Between Silver Guano: in Commercial andthe Policy State Postindependence Peru.
Princeton,N.J.:PrincetonUniversity Press.
ERWIN GRIESHABER,
'Artisansand Merchants:The Making ofan Open Economyin Lima, Peru, 1820 to 1860." M.Phil. thesis,OxfordUniversity.
1977 1979 1989
"Survival of Indian Communitiesin Nineteenth-Century Bolivia." Ph.D. diss., of University NorthCarolina, Chapel Hill. "Hacienda-Indian CommunityRelations and Indian Acculturation:An HistoriographicEssay." LARR 14, no. 3:107-28. "Curagas y tenientespoliticos:la ley de la costumbrey la ley del estado (Otavalo, 1830-1875)."RevistaAndina7, no. 2 (Dec.):321-63.
GUERRERO, ANDRES
HARRIS, OLIVIA, ET AL., EDS.
1987 La participaci6n indfgena losmercados en surandinos: estrategias y reproducci6n social,

siglosxvia xx. La Paz: CERES, 1987.
HUNEFELDT, CHRISTINE
1982 Lucha la tierraprotesta las delPeraenitre coloniia por y indigena: comnunidades inidigenias
Bonn: BonnerAmerikanische Studien. y republica. "Esclavitud urbana y vida familiaren un contexto multietnico:Lima, primera mitaddel siglo 19." Manuscript,Lima. "Poder y contribuciones: Puno, 1825-1845." Revista Andina 7, no. 2 (Dec.): 367-409. "Desarrollo econ6mico y relaciones de clase en el sur andino, 1790-1920: una replicaa Karen Spalding." Andlisis4 (May-Aug.):67-81. "Landtenure and Society in the Peruvian Altiplano: Azangaro Province, 17701920." Ph.D. diss., University California, of Berkeley. "The State and the Labor Market in Rural Bolivia in the Colonial and Early
1984 1989 1979
JACOBSEN, NILS
1982 1982
KLEIN, HERBERT S.
Republican Periods."In Essaysin thePolitical, Economic, SocialHistory and of

ColonialLatinAmerica, edited by Karen Spalding, 95-106. Newark: University of Delaware. 1848-1930. New York:PeterLang.
KRISTAL, EFRAIN
1987 The Andes Viewed the and on Indian Peru, in from City: Literary Political Discourse the
154
POPULATION
KUBLER, GEORGE
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
1952 TheIndian Caste Peru, 1795-1940: Population A Tax Study Based upon Records and of
CensusReports. Institute Social Anthropology of Publicationno. 14. Washington, D.C.: SmithsonianInstitution. ton, N.J.:PrincetonUniversity Press.
LARSON, BROOKE
1988 Colonialism Agrarian and Transformation inBolivia: Cochabamba, 1550-1900. Prince-
LAUSENT, ISABELLE
1983 Acos:pequeina propiedad, poder economia mercado y de del Lima: (Valle Chancay).
de Instituto Estudios Peruanos. 1981 "British Population in theEighteenthCentury."In TheEconomic History Britain of since1700, edited by R. Floud and D. McCloskey,1:17-35. Cambridge: Cambridge Press. University
LEE, R. D., AND R. S. SCHOFIELD
MACERA, PABLO
1977
1977 1972
"Las plantaciones azucareras andinas (1821-1875)." In Trabajos historia, edited de by Pablo Macera, 4:9-310. Lima: Instituto Nacional de Cultura. "Feudalismo colonial americano: el caso de las haciendas peruanas." In Trabajos de 3:139-228. historia, Andina.
MACERA, PABLO, COMP.
Tierra poblaci6n el Peru(ss. xviii-xix). Lima: Seminario de Historia Rural en y
MALLON, FLORENCIA E.
1978
in 1983 TheDefense CommunityPeru's Central Peasant and of Highlands: Struggle CapitalistTransition, 1860-1940. Princeton,N.J.:PrincetonUniversity Press.
NELSON MANRIQUE,
"Microeconomiay campesinado: hacienda, comunidad y coyunturasecon6micos en el valle de Yanamarca."Andlisis4:39-53.
1986 Colonialismo del y pobreza campesina: Caylloma el Valle Colca, y siglos xvi-xx. Lima: 1987 Mercado internoregi6n: sierra la y central, 1820-1930. Lima:DESCO. 1988 Yawar Mayu:sociedades terratenientes serranas, 1879-1910. Lima:DESCO.
DESCO.
MARTINEZ ALIER, JUAN
1973 1990 1987
Los huacchilleros Peru. Lima: Instituto Estudios Peruanos. del de
MENDEZ,
CECILIA
"Los campesinos, la independencia y la iniciaci6n de la Republica en el Peru." Manuscript,FLASCO, Quito. "Land Tenure and Communal Control of Land in Laros, Yauyos, Peru." Manuscript. "The PopulationProblemin Nineteenth-Century Lima." Manuscript, Amsterdam.
MEYER, ENRIQUE
MILLER, RORY
1988
MORNER, MAGNUS
in History Latin America. Boston: Brown. 1967 RaceMixture the of Little,

1977
Andinos 13. de rural Cuzcoa fines la colonia. del de Lima: Universidad del 1977 Perfil la sociedad
"La distribuci6nde ingresos en un distritoandino en los ahios 1830." Estudios
1985
MOSCOSO
Pacifico. The Andean Past: Land, Societies.and Conflicts. New York: Columbia University Press. "Comunidad, autoridad indigena y poder republicano." RevistaAndina 7, no. 2 (Dec.):481-501.
1989
C., MARTHA
PIEL, JEAN
1970 1975
"The Place of the Peasantry in the National Life of Peru in the Nineteenth Pastand Present (Feb.):108-33. 46 Century." au Paris: Anthropos. Capitalisme agraire Pe'rou.
155
American Review Research Latin

la de 1983- "Pastoreo andino y espejismos de eternidadtelu6rica: prueba en contrario la 1985 historia demografica de Espinar (Cuzco) de 1689 a 1940." Revista del Museo Nacional47:280-84.
PINI RODOLFI,
1972
'La poblaci6n del Peru a lo largo de un siglo, 1785-1884." In Informe Demogrdfico del Peru,1970, 19-125. Lima: Centrode Estudios de Poblaci6ny Desarrollo. en Ocupaciones el Peru, 1876. 4 vols. Lima: Universidadde San Marcos.
FRANCISCO
PINTO, H., AND A. GOICOCHEA
1977
PLATT, TRISTAN
andino: en de Lima:Instituto de 1982 Estado boliviano yayllu tierratributo elnorte Potosf. y

Estudios Peruanos. "Gamonalismo: tierray poder local en el siglo xix cuzquefio." B.A. thesis, Pontificia UniversidadCat6lica del Peru. "La sociedad local al inicio de la Repuiblica:Cusco, 1824-1850."RevistaAndina6, no. 2 (Dec.):451-84.
DAVID, ED.
REMY, MARIA ISABEL
1985
1988
ROBINSON,
in 1981 Studies Spanish American Population History. Boulder, Colo.:Westview.

1947 1978 Review "The Distributionof Indians and Indian Languages in Peru." Geographic 37, no. 2:202-15.
ROWE, JOHN
SAMANIEGO,
In in Farmer." Peasant Cooperation Capitalist and Expansion Central Peru, edited by

Norman Long and BryanR. Roberts,45-71. Austin: University TexasPress. of ThePopulation LatinAmerica: History. A of Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of CaliforniaPress, 1974. en Indiosy tributos el AltoPeru. Lima: Instituto Estudios Peruanos. de "Patternsof Urban and Regional Development in Peru on the Eve of the Pacific War."In Region and Class inModernPeruvian edited by RoryMiller, History, 77-102. Liverpool: Institute Latin AmericanStudies. of "Class Structuresin the SouthernPeruvian Highlands, 1750-1920." In Land and Powerin LatinAmerica.,edited by Benjamin Orlove and Glynn Custred, 79-98. New York:Holmes and Meier. Madison: University WisconsinPress. of in "The StruggleforSolidarity:Class, Culture,and Community Highland Indian America."RadicalHistory Review27:21-45. Twentieth Centuries. of Madison: University WisconsinPress.
KAREN NICOLAS
"Peasant Movements at the Turnof the Centuryand the Rise of the Independent
CARLOS
SANCHEZ-ALBORNOZ,
1974
1978 1987
SMITH, CLIFFORD T.
SPALDING,
1980
STERN, STEVE J.
Indian and 1982 Peru's to Peoples theChallenge Spanish of Huamanga 1640. Conquest:
1983
STERN, STEVE J., ED.
1987 Resistance, and in Andean Peasant World: to Rebellion, Consciousnessthe Eighteenth 1983 Politica del xix. econ6mico-financiera ylaformaci6n estado: siglo Lima:CEDEP.
"Earning a Living in Huaygayoc, 1870-1900." In Regionand Class in Peruvian edited by Rory Miller, 103-24. Liverpool: Instituteof Latin American History, Studies.
TANTALEAN A., JAVIER TAYLOR, LEWIS
year
TUTINO, JOHN
1986 1983
FromInsurrection Revolution Mexico. Princeton,N.J.: PrincetonUniversity to in Press, 1982. "De las rutas,feriasy circuitosen Huamanga." Allpanchis 21:47-64.
URRUTIA, JAIME
VARESE, STEFANO
1973
Lima: Retablo de Papel. La sal de los cerros.
156
POPULATION
WALKER, CHARLES
AND ETHNICITY
IN PERU
1989
"El estudio del campesinado en las ciencias sociales peruanas: avances, limitaciones y nuevas perspectivas."Allpanchis 33:165-205.
YEPES DEL CASTILLO, ERNESTO
1973 Peru,1820-1920: siglodel desarrollo un capitalista. Lima: Instituto Estudios de

Peruanos.
157

Population and Ethnicity Trends in Early 19th Century Peru

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Population and Ethnicity Trends in Early 19th Century Peru

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Population and Ethnicity in Early Republican Peru: Some Revisions Author(s): Paul Gootenberg Reviewed work(s): Source: Latin

AND ETHNICITY REPUBLICAN PERU: Some Revisions*

Latin American Research Review

Publicas Peruano Historia, de LiteraturaNoticias y published various in issues ofMercurio

1791 62,910 13,945 12,133 12,616 14,024 9,574 3,334 20,576

225,800 (Lima) 34,492 (Callao)

60,225 (Ica) 320,517

209,759 (Junin) 40,114 78,991 (Huanuco) 29,773a

25,091 38,638 44,llOa 42,715 5,349

121,462 155,799 244,186 573,580

46,122 70,683 62,597a 77,004a 147,336 (La Libertad)

TA B L E 1 (continued) 1876 (Departments 1862 Only) 27,696

Province Lambayeque Trujillo Huamachuco Jaen Piura

1791 35,192 12,032 38,150 6,200a

1836 43,202 12,032 43,058 6,706

Departmentaltotals 192,061 216,244 261,553 492,535a Amazonas Chachapoyas Maynas Pataz

25,398 15,000 13,508a

27,728 11,346 29,394a

17,952 14,129 27,748

(Loreto) Departmentaltotals Puno

39,074a 54,333 56,765 22,605 75,957 76,488

83,980a 47,912 59,217a 34,068 19,449a 44,682a

32,082 24,337 9,250 12,973 20,236 25,259 6,199 15,281

Province Cotabambas Chumbivilcas Tinta (Canas) Anta

1791 19,824 15,973 -

1850 23,241 22,050 37,605a 22,980a

Departmental totals 216,382 216,382e 346,211 310,652a

Huamanga Lucanas Parinacochas Cangallo Huanta

29,617 15,401 19,334a 20,176 26,358

19,184 51,701 130,070 236,577

Huancavelica Angaraes Castrovirreyna Tayacaja

17,301 17,318 14,348 27,151

26,240 18,761 40,802

76,118 108,638 245,284a 157,046

Departmental totals 142,476 159,608 206,188 345,215a

37,721 10,052 20,145 13,905

63,816 11,270 21,170 23,446 32,380 18,642

Camana' Condesuyos Caylloma Others Moquegua Arica/Tacna

12,063 12,448a 18,887 15,659a 37,944a 29,209

TA B L E 1 (continued) 1876 (Departments 1862 Only)

Departmental totals National totals

1,239,197 1,373,736 2,001,123 2,461,936

de y 6. See J.G. Paredes,Calendario gufade forasteros Lima,parael ano de 1837(Lima:

Latin American Research Review

dario gufa forasterosla Republica de y de Peruana el aino 1852(Lima:ImpJ de para Instrucci6n

Review Research Latin American

TAB L E 2 Unrevised Demographic 1791-1876 Rates, Years

Annual Rate (%)

Research Review Latin American

the famousEnsayo estadistica de de completa Aza'ngaro JoseDomingo by

Review American Latin Research

Income Total over Increase (pesos) 1793 figuresIndians Castas Population

-5,416 4,766 1,799 1,276 2,525 2,702 -740

2,549 10,791 12,368 10,243 16,140 10,981 617

2,139 8,737 -2,292 -1,062 1,592 8,845 43,893i 61,852

19,380g 37,854 9,048 7,121 11,321 25,409 6,387 15,069

17,660 23,169 5,486 6,051 7,143 24,250 18,754 29,041

131,589i 131,554 20,206 22,872 4,233

21,787 30,943 9,327 -10,398?k 10,275

Quispicanchi Urubamba Paucartambo Paruro Abancay Calca y Lares Total

949,733 695,101 310,271 406,977 798,139 456,489

TAB LE 3 (continued) Province Ayacucho Huamangaq Angaraes (Huancavelica) Parinacochas Lucanas

Total Income (pesos)