Land, Community, and Revolt in Late-Nineteenth-Century Indian Izalco, El Salvador

Land, Community, and Revolt in Late-Nineteenth-Century Indian Izalco, El Salvador
Author(s): Aldo A. Lauria-Santiago

Source: The Hispanic American Historical Review, Vol. 79, No. 3 (Aug., 1999), pp. 495-534
Published by: Duke University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2518288
Accessed: 01/06/2010 18:02
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=duke.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
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.
Duke University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Hispanic
American Historical Review.
http://www.jstor.org
Land, Community, and Revolt
in Late-Nineteenth-Century Indian
Izalco, El Salvador
Aldo A. Lauria-Santiago
Instances of violence in the Indian communities of late-nineteenth-century

El Salvadorhave often been cited as evidence of popular opposition to the
liberal state and resistanceto the privatizationof Indian-heldlands.1One such
instanceoccurredon the night of November I4, i898, when simmeringresent-
ments in the Indian community of Dolores Izalco (hereaftersimply Dolores)
erupted in a violent confrontation.2In addition to i6 leaders, more than 8o
The research on which this article is based was supported by a Department of Education
Fulbright Dissertation Fellowship, an SSRC Dissertation Research Fellowship, a Dorothy
Danforth Compton Dissertation Fellowship, and a Ford Foundation Minority Dissertation
Fellowship. Faculty grants from the New School for Social Research and the College of
the Holy Cross also assisted the organization of the research materials. I thank the
anonymous reviewers who provided very useful comments and suggestions for the
improvement of this article in its long journey to press. I also thank Jonathan Amith, Avi
Chomsky, Jeff Gould, Lowell Gudmundson, Gil Joseph, Mark Szuchman, and especially
Ingrid Vargas for their help and encouragement.
i. One recent survey summarizes this view: "The late nineteenth-century agrarian
laws intensified the competition between subsistence and commercial farmers and created
a large, permanent class of mobile, landless workers. The dislocating effects of these
measures were so great that local peasant revolts broke out throughout the coffee-growing
areas at periodic intervals during the final decades of the nineteenth century. The federal
government responded to this rural violence by assigning 'agriculturaljudges' to regulate
the movements of rural workers";Shelton Davis, "AgrarianStructure and Ethnic
Resistance: The Indian in Guatemalan and SalvadoranNational Politics," in Ethhnicities and
Nations:Pr-ocessesof Inter-ethnic
Relationsin Latin America,SoutheastAsia, and the Pacific,ed.
Remo Guidieri (Austin: Rothko Chapel, 1995), 87.
2. The term faction is useful because it implies a degree of political self-consciousness
and organization that, I believe, the documents used here justify. It is also appropriate as
the contemporary El Salvadoranterm used to denote a political grouping that mobilizes
for power or revolt.
HispanicAmericanHistor-icalReview 79:3
Copyright i999 by Duke University Press
496 HAHR / August / Lauria-Santiago
male Indianswere involved in the fighting, and at least 27 were capturedby

governmentauthorities.One of the targetsof the attackwas Simeon Morain,a
formeradministratorwho had been responsiblefor partitioningthe communal
lands.Moran was killed along with membersof his family and supporters,but
more significancehas been attributedto the fact that he had a hand chopped
off during the violence. This attackentered the historiographicalrecord in a
frequently cited account of Salvadorannineteenth-centuryland issues: "The
relationshipof cause and effect between the loss of land and the ruralworkers'
revolt is clear: in the revolt of i898, for example, various judges who had
dividedpublic lands were punishedby the severing of their hands,which they
had used to measureand distributethe land of the ruralworkers.'3Interpreta-
tions such as this stem from and contributeto the perpetuationof a relatively
straightforwardstory: Indian communities supported themselves through
subsistence agriculture,they came into conflict with the agro-export elites
and their repressivestate, they lost their lands when the liberal state enforced
the dissolutionof common lands, and they then revolted over the loss of these
lands.4The story thus constructedexplainsthe i898 attackon the supposedly
ladinojuezpartidoras a defensivemechanismagainstthe wholesale andviolent
appropriationof communitylands by outside coffee oligarchs.Without doubt
the privatizationof communallands is one of the most importanttransforma-
tions that has affected the history of El Salvador.However, as this articlewill
argue, conflicts over land tenure and the privatizationprocess in El Salvador
have long been misunderstoodand misinterpreted,preciselybecause general-
ized accounts of the privatizationprocess have rarely considered the internal
dynamicsof Indiancommunitiesand their complexpoliticalrelationshipswith
externalforces.
This article presents new research on the implementation and conse-
quences of the partitionand privatizationof Indian communallands in El Sal-
3. Abelardo Torres, "More from This Land,"TheAmericas14, no. 8 (i962): 9.

4.Studies of nineteenth-century Central America have sometimes tended to treat
Indians as an unchanging vestige of the colonial period, passively waiting to succumb to
ladinization, acculturation, and capitalism. Recent works on the politics of nineteenth-
century Indian communities have begun to challenge this view. For Mexico, see Florencia
E. Mallon, Peasantand Nation: The Making of PostcolonialMexicoand Peru (Berkeley: Univ.
of California Press, 1995); and Peter Guardino, Peasants,Politics,and the Formationof
Mexico' National State: Guerrero,1800o-I857 (Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press, i996). For
Nicaragua, see Jeffrey L. Gould, ToDie in This Way:NicaraguanIndiansand the Myth of
Mestizaje, 1880-1965 (Durham: Duke Univ. Press, i998); and for Guatemala, see David
McCreery,Rural Guatemala,I 760-1940 (Stanford:StanfordUniv.Press,1994).
Land, Community, and Revolt in Izalco 497
vador.By providinga close account of the internalconflicts and divisionsover

the partitionof lands in Dolores, one of Izalco'stwo indigenous communities
(the other was Asuncion Izalco), it examineshow the i898 revolt grew out of
complex local politics in Dolores. As reconstructedhere, factional divisions
within this growing and complex Indian community-factionalism that
resulted from its decades-long involvement with commercialagricultureand
regionalpolitical alliances-to a great extent determinedhow this community
experiencedthe partition of its lands. While previous accounts have consid-
ered the attackon thejuez partidorin Dolores to have been the result of a con-
frontation between Indian peasantsand the state, this article argues that the
confrontationemerged insteadfrom the fragmentationof local ethnic solidar-
ity and organization, which split the community into feuding factions that
activelyengagedexternalsocial and politicalforces.Along with their own com-
petitive interests, the alliancesmade by local peasantleaderswith local elites
and entrepreneurs,as well as with politicalactorsat the regionaland statelevel,
determinedhow the conflictiveprocess of privatizationplayedout. In the end,
the demise of Dolores as an indigenous communitywas not simply the result
of liberal reforms enforced by the state, but was also predicatedon the com-
plex maze of interests,both internaland external,that ran throughIzalco'stwo
Indian communities, Dolores and Asuncion, as they faced the privatizationof
their long-held lands.
Ethnicity and Agrarian Society in Izalco
Izalco is one of the largest municipalities in western El Salvador. In the mid-

nineteenth century it contained the largest Indian settlement in the region and
was surpassed in population only by the municipalities of Ahuachapain and
Santa Ana.5 Izalco's long tradition of combining small-scale peasant agricul-
5. For discussions of Izalco's colonial history, see Murdo J. MacLeod, SpanishCentral

America:A Socioeconomic History, I520-1720 (Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 1973);
Pedro Antonio Escalante Arce, C6diceSonsonate,2 vols. (San Salvador:Ministerio de
Educaci6n, 1992); William R. Fowler Jr., "The Political Economy of Indian Survival in
Sixteenth-Century Izalco, El Salvador,"in The SpanishBorderlandsin Pan-American
Perspective,ed. David Hurst Thomas (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press,
i99i); and David Browning, El Salvador:Landscapeand Society(Oxford: Clarendon Press,
1971), chap. 3. The data on Izalco's demographic history is from Lorenzo L6pez, Estadistica
generalde la Repziblicadel Salvador(San Salvador:Impr. Nacional, 1974); "Estadistica
parroquialSanta Ana,"GacetaOficial,Apr. i862, p. 3; El Constitucional(San Salvador), 6
June i867; Antonio Ipifia, "Estadisticadel departamento de Sonsonate, i866,
ture with commercialproductionbegan in the sixteenthcenturyand extended

into the twentieth, despite the increasedcommercializationof agrariansociety
in the region. A report from I77I shows that apartfrom the individualsubsis-
tence and collective cacao farms of Indian communities, the only other agri-
culturalactivity in the Izalco region was that of two haciendas.6Almost one
hundredyears later (i866), Izalco was reported to have 200 small farms (cha-
20 cattlefarmshatsos,one grain-
cras),360 smallpastures(huatalesand repastos),
producing hacienda (haciendaagri'cola),and 2 cattle haciendas (haciendade
ganado).7By i900 there were slightly more haciendasin Izalco, althoughthese
were smallerthan those of i866, having been formed by the subdivisionof the
older estates. There were also a greaternumber of small peasantfarms, and a
rapidlygrowing number of middle-sized commercialfarms. While most local
families held sufficient land for both subsistence and market production, a
small but growing number of Izalco peasantsbegan to work for wages on the
haciendas and emerging commercial farms of the Sonsonate-Ahuachapain
region. In part, peasantsengaged in wage labor in order to complement their
subsistence and commercialproduction;but during the i88os and i89os, the
expandingrole of wage work also reflectedthe impactof a deepening disparity
in access to land and irrigation among both Indian and ladino peasants in
Izalco.8 Izalco's ladino population-an ethnic category that in El Salvador
reprinted in Boletznde la DireccidnGeneralde Estadisticade la Repiblicade El Salvador4, no. 2

(Mar. i906); Rafael Bar6n Castro, La poblaci6nde El Salvador-(San Salvador:UCA Editores,
1978); Manuel de GAlvez, "Relaci6n geogrAficade la provincia de El Salvador (I740),
Archive General de la Naci6n, folleto no. 27 (i966), mimeo; and Pedro Cortes y Larraz,
Descr-ipci&ngeografico-mioral (Guatemala: Sociedad de Geograffa e
de la diocesisde Goathemrala
Historic de Guatemala, 1958). During the mid-eighteenth century, most ladinos resided in
Dolores Izalco; see Cortes y Larraz, Descripcidngeogra'fico-mroral,146.
6. See Cortes y Larraz, Descripci6ngeografico-mor-al.
7. The 560 smaller units (farms and pastures) yield an average of about one unit for
every three households, a result very similar to that found years later in 1926; see Ipifia,
"Estadisticadel departamento de Sonsonate, i866."
8. In 1859 a total of i6% of Izalco's male labor force was classified asjornaleros-the
highest percentage of any town in western El Salvador. See Aldo Lauria-Santiago, An
Agrarian Republic:CommercialAgricultureand the Politicsof Peasant Coinmmunities in El
Salvadoi;I1824-19 18 (Pittsburgh:Univ. of PittsburghPress, i999), chap.4. By I896
Izalco's tax records listed 73% of the population asjownaler-os;see "N6mina de individuos
que deben contribuir al fondo de caminos en Izalco," 28 June i896, Archivo de la
Gobernaci6n de Sonsonate (hereafter AGS). While this represents a large increase in the
number of wage workers, it should not be understood to mean that most of Izalco's
peasants had been fully proletarianized. Instead, it reflected the seasonal occupation of
includedall non-Indians,includingthose "formerIndians"who simply started

to define themselves as ladinos-had grown steadily during the preceding
half-century.Between i850 and i870, the percentageof the populationidenti-
fied as ladino increasedsignificantly,and by the i89os the approximately9,000
inhabitantsof Izalco were divided roughly equally between Indians and ladi-
nos.9The ladinizationof the population and its effects on land tenure were a
source of increasingtensions and conflict throughoutthe century.
During the i84os and i850s, Izalquefiosclaimed to be too poor to satisfy
the small contributionsthat the government expected from them in order to
finance its-warswith Guatemalaand its campaignagainstWilliam Walker in
Nicaragua.10But by the i86os, commercialagricultureand trade were flour-
ishing in the region and Izalco'slarge commercial feria was attractingmany
merchants.1"Agriculturalentrepreneursin Izalco had embarkedupon efforts
to produce coffee and sugar,and by the i89os the municipalitywas a dynamic
and diversifiedagriculturalcenter that tied both ladino and Indianpeasantsto
local and regional networksof trade,credit, labor,and land.12
In regard to its major commercialcrops, in i892 Izalco produced only a
many peasants who continued to have access to their own land. Smallholding peasants also
had a strong incentive to declare themselves jornaleros,since their public works tax would
be lower.
9. Gustav Ferdinand von Tempsky, Mitla: A Narrative of Incidentsand Personal
Adventureson a Journeyin Mexico, Guatemala,and Salvadorin the Years1 853 to I 855, ed. J.
S. Bell (London: Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans & Roberts, 1858), 414. In i895
Izalco had 9,100 residents; see Santiago I. Barbarena,Monografiasdeparta-mentales:
departamentode Sonsonate(San Salvador:Impr. Nacional, 1910), 56.
io. "Sobre la recolecci6n del emprestito asignado al distrito,"i9 Dec. 1846, Archivo
General de la Naci6n de El Salvador,Colecci6n Clasificados (hereafter AGN-CC), A3.I3,
exp. 14; "Que para llevar el emprestito forzoso de i5,000 pesos que debe recaudarseen todo
el estado, la junta de Izalco le ha asignado 20 pesos a esa poblaci6n ... ," i6 Dec. 1846,
AGN-Colecci6n Preclasificados (hereafter AGN-CPC); and, for a letter "pidiendo pago de
la escolta necesaria para remitir a la capital a los renuentes a contribuir,"see Antonio Ipifia
(Governor of Sonsonate) to Ministro de Hacienda y Guerra, 27 Feb. 1857, AGN-CPC.
i i. Mrs. Foote, Recollectionsof CentralAmericaand the WestCoastof Africa (London: T.
Cautley Newby, i869), 86.
12. In i865 Izalco had over 200 small peasant-held farms on which a combination
of coffee and plantains were cultivated. During this early period, the municipality did
not develop any of the larger farms that were typical of coffee-producing centers such as
Santa Ana, Chalchuapa, and Santa Tecla. Yet Izalco had more farms that produced
coffee than most municipalities; Ipifia, "Estadistica del departamento de Sonsonate,
i866."
modest amount coffee, about i50 tons, most of which was cultivatedby small-
scale growers, both Indian and ladino.13However, by the early twentieth
century the bulk of Izalco's coffee was produced in the hacienda of El
Sunza,which was owned by the Araujofamily.14Izalco'ssugarproductionalso
increased,though its development seems to have preceded that of coffee by a
couple of decades.Thus in i892 there were I2 medium-sizedsugarcanefarms
and dozens of smaller farms (usuallydedicatedto the production of aguardi-
ente or panelafor local markets)in operationby i892.15Yet despite the expan-
sion of enterprisesdedicatedto sugar and coffee, these crops did not displace
agriculturalproductionfor local consumption, and the region remaineda net
exporter of grains and other basic food products well into the twentieth
century. Thus even though Izalco participated in the expansion of export
and commercialagriculture,its older patternsof subsistenceagriculture,sea-
sonal wage labor,and diversepeasantparticipationin local and regional mar-
kets remainedimportantfeaturesof the local economy.16
The politics of nineteenth-centuryeconomic development in the region
must be understood in the context of historical patterns of land tenure.
Throughout the colonial period, landownershiphad been central to the sta-
tus and identity of Izalco'sIndian communities.Izalco had been composed of
two distinct towns, each controlled by its own Indian community.After inde-
pendence these two adjacent towns were united, separated, and finally
Nicolis Barrera(Alcalde of Izalco) to Governor of Sonsonate, report, 12 Dec.

13.
1892,AGN-Colecci6n Gobernaciones-Sonsonate (hereafter AGN-CG-SO). This level of

production required roughly 280 hectares of land and was distributed among 195
producers; El Salvador,Memoriapresentadapor el Ministrode Gobernaci6n,Guerray Marina
DoctorDomingo]imenez a la AsambleaNacional (1[892) (San Salvador:Impr. Nacional, 1893),
62.
14. Emilio Araujo was the father of President Arturo Araujo, who was overthrown in
the December1931 coup thatprecededtheJanuary1932 revolt.All accountsof the 1932
revolt have failed to notice that the Araujo family was the largest landowner and employer
of wage labor in Izalco. In i9i0 El Sunza produced 36,ooo quintals of sugar and its hacienda
de beneficioprocessed 15- i6,ooo quintals of coffee. It also held around i,000 head of cattle;
see Barbarena,Monografz'as departamentales: departamentode Sonsonate,55.
15. These farms held 200 manzanas (1 mnanzana equals 0.7 hectares) and produced
40,000 pesos worth of sugar. Nicolis Barrera(Alcalde of Izalco) to Governor of Sonsonate,
report, 12 Dec. 1892, AGN-CG-SO.
i6. The smallholding character of much coffee production and other agricultural
activities survived at least until the 1950s, when Richard Adams visited the region. See
Richard N. Adams, CulturalSurveysof Panama, Nicaragua, Guatemala,El Salvador,Honduras
(Washington,D.C.: PanAmericanSanitaryBureau,1957), 509.
Land, Community, and Revolt in Izalco 50I
reunited in a single municipality.17Still, despite the establishmentof a single

municipalcenter and urbancore, the two Indian communities,Asuncion and
Dolores, retaineddistinctidentities,corporaterepresentation,and control over
local resources, which included two urban barrios, agricultural land, and
irrigationsystems.18Landownershipprovided the basis for Izalco'seconomic
and political autonomy,and after independence command over this resource
allowed the Indian communities to control the settlement of ladinos in the
region. Before the i850s Izalco'stwo Indian communities had been adamant
about keeping ladinos off their lands and out of municipal office-a goal
they did not always achieve. Although before midcentury Indians did retain
control over all common lands, after the i850s the ladino population,includ-
ing an emerging commercialelite, expandedand ladinos came to control most
seats in the municipal government, eventually acquiringcontrol over the 70
caballeras of municipalejidos.
(3,I50 hectares)
In i867 the second administrationof President FranciscoDuefias (i863-
71) ordered the separationof municipaland communitylands throughoutthe
nation. While providinglegal recognition and protectionto community-based
landholding that fell outside of municipal ejido lands, this act also facilitated
ladino encroachmentonto lands in Izalco. According to the new legislation,
lands that were originallyallocatedto a town as part of an initial colonial land
grant (usually37 caballerfas) would be recognized as an ejido and managed by
the municipalcorporation,which could rent the land to any town resident or
settler. Any additionallands purchasedby or granted to groups of peasants,
usuallya long-standingladino or Indiancommunity,would continue to be col-
lectively owned and controlled as communal lands. For Izalco, the effect of
this legislation was to place ejido lands under ladino control by virtue of their
hold on the municipalgovernment.Actual compliancewith the i867 legisla-
tion took a few years in Izalco, but by i870 Dolores and Asuncion had moved
17. Izalco's population remained stable between the late eighteenth century (5,305 in
1768 and 6,879 in 1807) and the mid-nineteenth century (7,400 in 1858). By i895 it had
increased to around 9,000, half of whom were Indians. However, this represented a net loss
of Indian population since the late eighteenth century, when the entire population was
Indian. In total, Izalco's two Indian communities comprised about I,200 households around
the time of privatization.
i8. On communal control of irrigation and water resources, see Cruz Shupan,
"Administradory juez de la comunidad de Asunci6n Izalco solicita al gobernador prevenga
al seflor alcalde municipal se abstenga. ... ," 26 Nov. i89i, AGS. Except for a conflict in
1852, the two communities had amicable relations that included agreements on the
separationof their lands; L6pez, Estadisticageneral.
to clarifytheir holdings and distinguishthem from the municipalejidos,which

were now controlled by ladinos. For some time the ladino-controlledmunici-
pality had claimed rights over the Indian'scommunallands and charged rent
to its occupants.But afterlitigation in i870, the Indian communitiesregained
undisputedcontrol over their lands (the excess beyond 37 caballer/asthat had
belonged to Asuncion and Dolores, which had been Izalco'soriginal munici-
palities)and Indian tenants stopped paying the canon(landrent) to the munic-
ipality.19Together, the two Indian communities held almost i50 caballer/as
(6,750 hectares) of land, while the municipality controlled another 72 caba-
i/erzas(3,240 hectares)as ejidos.20This placed both the municipalityof Izalco
and its two Indiancommunitiesamong the largestholdersof common landsin
the country. By i879 Izalco'sextensive municipal ejidos had all been rented,
often to ladino entrepreneursand farmers from Izalco and Sonsonate who
establishedfarms and pasturesin Izalco, generating a significantincome that
i9. "Documentaci6n de la solicitud de las comunas de Dolores y Asunci6n Izalco para
que se les entregaran las listas de las personas que deben pagar can6n," 1870, AGS.
20. Community landholding in El Salvador had its roots in the colonial period.
During the late colonial era, Izalco's small Indian population took advantage of the crown's
protection and preferential treatment by titling a significant number of caballer/fas.
They
sought control of extensive lands surrounding their towns not only to keep the cattle of
ladinos away from their crops but also to preempt ladino and Spanish settlers from
establishing claims to local authority or municipal power; "Testimonio de los titulos
ejidales y communales de Izalco," 1878, AGN-CG-SO. For a revealing document on
Indian attempts to exclude ladinos from participating in their local polities, see "Informe
que el secretario de relaciones hace a la Naci6n de orden del Presidente de la Reptiblica,
sobre la conducta del Licenciado Nicolas Espinosa, Gefe del Estado del Salvador,"Archivo
Nacional de Costa Rica, Secci6n Federal, exp. 384. In 1820 a small group of ladinos stated
a claim for some of the municipality's lands for grazing their cattle. They protested to the
local authorities in the city of Sonsonate that the Indians of Izalco had been allowed to
entirely exclude ladinos from the town's common lands. These conflicts date to at least the
late colonial period. See, for example, "Los ladinos de ambos Izalcos sobre que se les
asignen algunas tierras de las de los comunes de indigenas," 1820, AGN, Colecci6n
Alcaldias, Sonsonate. During the earlier colonial period it had been crown policy to
exclude non-Indians from the Indian towns-the nearby city of Sonsonate was founded to
segregate whites and ladinos from the surrounding Indian tributaries.
In 1768 Izalco had 5,305 residents and in 1796 about i,ooo tributarios(adult
nonexempt tax-paying men); see Cortes y Larraz, Descripcin geografico-moral; and
"Testimonio de las tasaciones o rateos de tributos de los pueblos de esta provincia de
Sonsonate," 1796, AGN-CG-SO. For a longer discussion of the colonial origins of peasant
landholding in Central America, see Lauria-Santiago, Agrarian Republic,chap. 2; and
Severo Martinez Palaez, La patr-iadel criollo(San Jose: EDUCA, 1973), chap. 4.
was controlled by the ladino municipal leaders.21 Privately owned haciendas

and farms made up the municipality's remaining 270 caballerf'as(I2,I50 hec-
tares) of land.22
There is significant evidence that politically and economically successful
ind/genas detached themselves from their communities.23 Although recently
"ladinoized" indi'genascontinued to rent communal lands, some began to join
the ranks of a growing ladino elite. Alongside this new elite were older ladino
families (such as the Barrientos, Vega, and Herrera families) who continued as
some of the principal tenants of both municipal and communal lands. Their
initial wealth derived from commercial farms that they had developed on the
town's municipal ejidos, but they rapidly extended their operations into other
financial ventures. During the 20 years from i88o to i900, they also came to
control the extensive small-scale transactions in plots, loans, cash advances,
and coffee and grain sales in which hundreds of Indian and ladino peasants
from Izalco participated.24 The significance of their activity was recognized in
I9I3 by the governor of Sonsonate, who attributed Izalco's "flowering pro-
gress" to the "many and very important ladino families who have managed to
dominate the Indian masses, since for many years the local authorities have
been composed of ladinos.'25
Relations between Indian peasants and the ladino entrepreneurs who reg-
ularly attempted to use their control over the municipal government to favor
21. "Libro de actas municipales de Izalco," 1874- 85, Archivo Municipal de Izalco
(hereafter AMI). That same year Izalco joined the many other municipalities that gave its
ejido tenants an incentive to plant commercial crops by reducing the land rent to those
who planted one-third of their lands with these crops. Revenues from these rentals was
controlled and expended by community leaders and not redistributed to community
members.
22. "Titulo de las tierras de Izalco sacado a solicited del comrin de Asunci6n," i866,
AMI. An 1893 report indicated that the municipality of Izalco held a total of 500 cabanller/as
of land; "Informe de comercio y agriculture correspondiente al distrito de Izalco," 7 Feb.
1893, AGN-CG-SO.
23. Ines Masin, who served as municipal secretary (I89i) and mayor (1893-96) and
became a successful farmer of lands that he had purchased from one of the particio7leros
of Dolores, was in all likelihood an indigena. His father had served as community
administratorduring the 187os, and he went on to write articles about the dialect of
Izalco'sIndians; see Ines Masin, "El pipil de Izalco,"Revistade Etmologia,A4quelog/ay
Lingiiistica(San Salvador) i, no. 5 (1926).
24. "Librosde documentosprivadosde Izalco,"i880-i900, AMI.
25.Governor of Sonsonate, "Informe de la visita oficial a los pueblos del
departamento," 20 Sept. 19I3, AGS.
their families and allies often turned conflictive and litigious.26 But tensions
related to access to land also existed within the Indian communities themselves,
particularly given that many Indian comuneros had begun to develop valuable
commercial sugar and coffee farms on community lands. There is ample evi-
dence that variations in plot sizes and in commercial activity had led to signif-
icant differentiation among comuneros in both of Izalco's indigenous communi-
ties.27 Clearly then, intracommunity competition and conflicts for control of
valuable, parcels did not begin with the privatization of land. As Izalco's agri-
cultural frontier started to close as a result of expanding population and com-
mercial production, the centuries-old limits-both physical and conceptual-
on common land use were about to be tested and transformed.
The Partition of Community Lands in Dolores Izalco
In i88i and i882, as part of its attempt to stimulate investment in commer-

cial "agricultureand create a class of entrepreneurial peasants and farmers, the
Salvadoran state abolished corporate rights to village and municipal lands.
The principal motive for privatization was to encourage those farmers and
peasants already involved in commercial production to expand their invest-
ments. Throughout the country, hundreds of valuable coffee and sugar farms
of all sizes had been established on municipal ejidos and community lands, but
the land remained the property of a corporate body. By the late i870s, signifi-
cant sectors of the population considered communal and municipal land
tenure to be an obstacle to further agricultural development. Members of
Indian communities who already engaged in commercial agriculture often
supported the transition from corporate to private holdings, which would give
26. See "Los sefiores Indalecio Chilulum y Teodoro Gonzalez ... se quejan de que el
alcalde municipal ... da apoyo a Martin Sanches para que 6ste les despoje ... ," 20 Sept.
i898, AGS, for an example of a conflict involving support by municipal authorities for one
party. In 1874 the community of Dolores failed in its attempt to block the rental of lands
claimed as ejidalesby two ladino farmers. Local administrators decided that the ioo tareasin
question were part of the municipal ejidos and now owned by the community. Sixteen
tareasare equivalent to one manzana. The ladino tenants were members of two families
that would later become the wealthiest ones in Izalco: the Barrientos and the Vegas; "Libro
de actas municipales de Izalco," 1874, AMI. See also "Variosindividuos del comiin de
indfgenas de Dolores Izalco se quejan contra don Calixto Vega por haberles tapado un
camino," 1892, AGN-CG-SO; and "Solicitud de la municipalidad de Izalco," 1892,
AGN-CG-SO, for examples of conflicts between Indian peasants and a local landowner.
27. See Lauria-Santiago, Agrarian Republic,chap. 8, for a discussion of the class-based
divisions and conflicts that erupted within Asunci6n during this same period.
them more secure ownership of lands that they farmed continually and that
they had improved by investing in the construction of permanent structures.
Comuneroswho controlled large farms linked to commercial networks stood to
gain the most from privatization. But in the context of unequal and contested
access to community lands, continued guaranteed access to a subsistence plot
could also benefit smallholders.
The privatization of land in Dolores was a long and conflictive process,
but the numerous internal disputes and the frequent protests made to external
authorities were overwhelmingly about the implementation of the laws, and
did not challenge the justice or intent of the laws themselves. The state played
a contradictory and complex role in privatizing corporate holdings and in
managing and mediating diverse interests. While the Salvadoran national state
was sufficiently consolidated by the early i88os to conceive, justify, and legis-
late a national transformation of land ownership, it did not have the technical,
administrative, juridical, or police resources to actually carry out the partition
nor assure its completion. Instead, the state relied on local officials, including
municipal and community leaders, to carry out the reform. Paradoxically then,
although the law privatizing communal land eliminated the legal status of
communities, in practice it established a policy that resulted in adding another
administrative function, that of land partition, to the communal organization
of villages. The implementation of the law was a therefore contentious issue
that provoked internal strife as community factions were pitted one against
another, each trying to secure the best parcels of land for itself. But differences
were not limited to struggles over access to land; political conflicts, often con-
nected to broader regional and national disputes, affected privatization and
exacerbated internal rivalries and animosities.
Of all the indigenous communities in western El Salvador, Dolores suf-
fered from one of the most prolonged, tortuous, and conflictive processes of
land partition and privatization.28 Divisions both internal and external to the
community exacerbated the technical difficulties of a procedure that involved
surveying hundreds of small plots, rights to which were based on ancient land
titles and local custom. Near the beginning of this process, the community of
Dolores became divided, probably along lines associated with political alli-
ances and kinship rather than emerging class differences. The partitioning and
titling of the community's extensive landholdings was complicated by these
conflicts and by the competing interests of comnunerofactions that struggled
28. Its neighbors in Asunci6n were not spared conflicts similar to those described
below.
5o6 HAHR / August / Lauria-Santiago
for control over land and the process of privatization. Disputes escalated to the
point of violence as the factions created and then mobilized political alliances
that transcended Indian and municipal politics in Izalco. During the previous
decades, various community factions had established patron-client relations
with potential allies among national politicians. In part this was a legacy of
Izalco's participation in the political and military alliances that had divided El
Salvador since independence; in part it stemmed from the general acceptance
of the national state's land policies and from the community's reliance on legal
and clientelistic ties to resolve its conflicts. Because of these complications, the
division of the lands of Dolores extended over five presidential administra-
tions. And with each presidential succession came new possibilities for alli-
ances, delays, or reversals.
Although the abolition of communal holdings was ordered in i88i, there
is little documented evidence of any progress in the partition of Dolores
Izalco's lands before i885. By then the community was already suffering from
internal divisions relating to the partition. That same year, after a recent
change in government, at least I3I male comunerosfrom Dolores sent a com-
plaint to the new president, General Francisco Menendez (i885 _90).29 The
authors accused Simeon Moran, the Indian comunerowho during the previous
presidential administration had been elected by community leaders to par-
tition community lands, of seriously abusing his position and of failing to
complete his mandate. According to their complaint, Morain had embezzled
money from "collections" he had made and from lands he had sold to out-
siders. The petition noted the indifference of officials toward the local com-
munities during the administration of the previous president, Doctor Rafael
ZaldIVar (1876-85), including the hostility of General Hipolito Belloso, who
had been governor of Sonsonate, toward these same communities. Some peti-
tioners complained of having been jailed for denouncing abuses.30
The Indian petition to President Menendez reflected previously estab-
29. "Solicitud al SPE sobre exijir al administrador Sime6n Moran la partici6n de la
extinguida comunidad de Dolores Izalco," I3 July 1885, AGN-CG-SO.

30. This characterization of the Zaldivar regime resonates with descriptions from
other regions (see below) and the justifications offered by elite and plebeian liberal factions
to organize against him. It is ironic that it was the same administration that passed the laws
ordering the privatization of lands that was unable to achieve any progress at the local
level. Zaldivar'sgovernment was overthrown in I885 in what amounted to a triple
mobilization involving Guatemalan forces, Indian and peasant uprisings, and elite
insurgency (see text); see ibid.
lished political alliances. In i885 a combination of popular revolts, factional

mobilizations, and an invasion by Guatemala led to the overthrow of Zaldivar,
whose regime had lasted nine years. When Guatemalan presidentJusto Rufino
Barrios attacked El Salvador on April i, i885, with the aim of toppling Zaldf-
var's government, his massive forces took the towns of Chalchuapa and Santa
Ana, located between Izalco and the Guatemalan border, with the support of
500 Salvadoran militia men, mostly Indian peasants from El Volcain de Santa
Ana, Nahuizalco, and Atiquizaya.31 These comuneroswere in effect allied with

prominent western liberals and landowners such as General Francisco Menen-
dez, Rafael Meza, Rosa Pacas, and Manuel Pacas, all of whom supported the
overthrow of Zaldivar. While Indian comunerosfought against Zaldivar, the
ladino elite that controlled Izalco's municipal government supported the pres-
ident's rule and formed their own alliances with other supporters from outside
the region.32 In the extensive fighting that ensued, parts of Izalco itself were
attacked by General Figueroa, a Zaldivar supporter whose troops robbed and
raped a number of Izalco Indians.33
After Menendez had replaced Zaldivar as president, the Indians of Izalco
began to test the new political waters, hoping to tilt the local balance of power in
their favor by consolidating their alliances with the new national coalitions. The
new departmental governor, receptive of the comrnueros' complaint against Moran,
relieved him of his position and began judicial proceedings against him.34 How-
31. As part of this movement against Zaldivar, but also as an expression of local
peasant politics, 8oo Indian militiamen took up arms in Cojutepeque during May 1885.
There were concurrent mobilizations of Indian militias in the department of La Paz; Duke
to Porter, 28 May I885, United States, Department of State, Dispatches from U.S.
Consuls in San Salvador,United States National Archives (hereafter USNA), Record
Group 59; and BaltasarEstupianian, Memrnoia con que el S-. Ministr-ode GobeirnacidnDoctor-
Don BaltasarEstupinidn,didcuentaa la HonorableAsambleaNacional (i 885- I 886) (San
Salvador:Impr. Nacional, 1887), 232. In La Paz, Zaldivar'sown properties were attacked
by his workers; see Julio C. Calder6n, Episodiosnacionales:AnastacioAquinoy el por que de su
rebelidnen 1833 en SantiagoNonualco(San Salvador:Impr. Moreno, 1957), 48. Local
hacendados joined with the Indians but withdrew their support after the latter used the
opportunity to settle accounts with local merchants; see Abraham Pifieda Alvarado, Resefia
histdiricade SantiagoNonualco(Santiago Nonualco, El Salvador:n.p., 1959).
32. Local ladino merchants and artisans had also supported the coming to power of
Santiago Gonzalez in 187i by providing funds for the revolt against the Duefias
government; see "Lista de los individuos que voluntariamente ha emprestado dinero a esta
gobernaci6n para los gastos en la revoluci6n," 12 May I871, AGN-Colecci6n Quemados.
33. "Informaci6n de orden superior sobre perjuicios causados por las tropas del
General Figueroa en la ciudad de Izalco," I885, AGN-CG-SO.
ever, after four years as administrator, Morain had left a bitter legacy of divisions
and conflict that would only deepen as the partition process proceeded.
Following Morain'sremoval, community leaders elected Francisco Punche
to continue with the partition of their land, but his efforts did not fare well
either. Soon after his election in i886, Punche, an Indian, was threatened with
arrest as a result of complaints that community members had sent to the gov-
ernor.35In i887 about 75 comuneroslodged an additional complaint, requesting
the removal of the new Indian partidory administrador,Francisco Correa, who
had succeeded Punche. They accused him of crimes similar to those that had
been attributed to Morain: selling off communal lands for low prices, demand-
ing contributions in cash and grain from comuneros,and embezzling commu-
nity funds. These discontented comuneros, including some who had in fact
voted for Correa, accused him of enriching himself at their expense. Correa
defended himself before the governor, explaining that the community was
divided, and that those who opposed him were looking for any excuse to
remove him. The true reason for the complainants' opposition, he asserted,
was that he would not assign them additional lands after they had sold their
initial lots to outsiders. He offered substantial proof that the sale of plots to
ladinos had been made according to the legal procedures of the partition, for
appropriate amounts of money, and that the revenues had gone toward paying
a surveyor and his assistant. He also pointed out that many of the signatures
on the complaint against him were falsified, since among them was the signa-
ture of his own aide, whom he knew with certainty had not signed the peti-
tion.36 As a result of these conflicts, by the late i88os the community was hope-
34. "Solicitud al SPE sobre exijir al administrador Sime6n Moran la partici6n de la

extinguida comunidad de Dolores Izalco," 13 July 1885, AGN-CG-SO. In regard to the
division of lands by Moran in Dolores, see Eduardo Barrientos (Alcalde of Izalco) to
Governor of Sonsonate, i886, AGN-CG-SO.
35. "Carta del alcalde de Izalco respondiendo a quejas sobre la repartici6n de tierras,"
I Dec. i886, AGN-CG-SO; and Santiago Contreras, Memoriaconque el seniorsub secretario
de estadoencargadodel despachode gobernacidn,Dr D. Santiago Contreras,did cuentade los actors
delpoderejecutivoocurridosen 1887 a la HonorableAsambleaNacional(San Salvador:Impr.
Nacional, i888), "13.
36. "Los individuos de la comunidad de indigenas de Dolores Izalco piden la
remoci6n del administradory juez partidor Francisco Conco [sic]por ciertos delitos que le
han denunciado," 1887, AGN-CG-SO. An additional complication in this partition process
occurred during the hiatus between the removal of one partidorand the installation of his
successor, when some comunerosoften took it upon themselves to divide and distribute
lands in their own sector, leading to complaints from those who considered themselves
harmed by their actions; see "Solicitud al gobernador de Sonsonate," i888, AGS.
lessly divided. Although it is not always possible to precisely identify who did
what to whom, the repeated clashes make it clear that the problem was not
simply caused by the character or personal ambitions of the various partidores.
Instead, what emerges is a process of complex political positioning and reposi-
tioning by groups of comunerosin which any long-standing sense of communal
solidarity fell apart.
The election of a new partidor y administrador in i889 provides further
evidence of the conflicts and tensions within Dolores. Like the election of
administrators before the legal abolition of communities, this election was
supervised by the local mayor. He found that one community faction had
excluded a large number of Indians from the official list of community mem-
bers.37 The governor noted that his efforts to conciliate the two factions by
electing a neutral person had failed. Because of this failure and the endemic
problems in Dolores, he called on the National Assembly to reverse the law
that had privatized communal lands, "since under the current law to try to par-
titionkcommunities is to create a threat to public order.'38 That same year the
governor reported to the Ministry of the Interior that the elected admin-
istrators usually did not dedicate themselves to assigning lands, but instead
involved themselves in quarrelsome affairs that only delayed the partitioning
and exacerbated community divisions.39 By this time tensions were so high
that armed comuneroswere holding late-night meetings in the countryside.40
By i89i, ten years of conflict had resulted in a community that had virtually
ceased to function. The selling of the assembly house that had once been used
for community meetings, "because the large meetings of before are no longer
held, was a clear signal that internal cohesion and solidarity were in decline.41
37. Of 184 members of the community who attended the election, 49 had not been
officially registered as comuneros,although the mayor recognized them as community
members. The minister of the interior ruled that the votes of these additional comuneros
should be registered, even though this would not alter the election results.
38. "Consulta que el alcalde municipal de Izalco dirije al Supremo Gobierno por
conducto de la gobernaci6n con motivo de la elecci6n del administradorjuez partidor y
socio de la comunidad de Dolores," i889, AGN-CG-SO.
39. Governor of Sonsonate to Ministro de Gobernaci6n, draft of report, i889,
AGN-CG-SO.
40. Samuel Carrizales (Local Commander in Izalco) to Commander General of the
Department of Sonsonate, 24 Sept. i888, AGS; and "Informaci6n seguida sobre averiguar
algunas novedades ocurridas en Izalco," i888, AGN-CG-SO.
41. "Luciano Argueta administradory juez partidor de la comunidad de Dolores
Izalco pide autorizacion para vender una galera de teja que correspond a la misma
comunidad,"I889, AGN-CG-SO.
5iO HAHR / August / Lauria-Santiago
Luciano Argueta, who served as the partidor y administrator of Dolores

from i890 to i895, was more circumspect than previous administrators, and
before he proceeded to divide the land, he compiled a list of 266 mostly male
comuneroswho were entitled to receive titled plots.42 The governor ordered
Argueta to add many more names to the list, resulting in a total of 49I comu-
neros.43Despite these advances, however, the community still failed to allot
the required amount of lands, even after an i89i decree that established national
guidelines and a timetable for a new partitioning and titling of communal
lands. That year a change in government again provided an opportunity to
resolve the issue, when General Carlos Ezeta (i89i-94), with some Indian
support, overthrew Menendez's increasingly unpopular and repressive govern-
ment. By allowing communities more generous terms and greater time to par-
tition their lands, Ezeta provided peasants with an opportunity to solve their
pending land disputes without losing their claims in the legal limbo of the late
i88os. To take advantage of this decree, the community of Dolores needed to
secure a new surveyor, something they failed to do within the allotted time
because, so they claimed, they lacked the funds. Attempts by the Ezeta regime
to gain support in the countryside, especially in the west, gave local factions
the idea that they need not hurry to finish partitioning their land. By the early
i89os, a stalemate acceptable to all sides seems to have been reached.
Following another change in presidents in 1895, when General Rafael
Antonio Gutierrez (1895-98) took office, the conflicts again heated up. The for-
42. "Variosindigenas de Izalco que haga la partici6n de los terrenos que
pertenecieron a la extinguida comunidad de Dolores," I903, AGN-Colecci6n Ministerios-

Ministerio de Gobernaci6n (hereafter AGN-CM-MG).
43. About 75% of these men were registered asjona-nleros, despite the obvious fact that
they possessed lands. Some of these plots were of substantial size, although many were
probably sufficient only to meet the subsistence needs of the families who owned them. See
"Copia de la matricula de los comuneros de Dolores Izalco," i889, AGN-CG-SO. Another
registry book drawn up in i89i lists 6I7 male community members. An incomplete sample
of the parcels titled in the i88os by Mormnlists I23 plots, ranging from one to sixty-six
manzanas,with an average of four. The larger plots were probably the ones that were
rented to outsiders, since this register lists only a handful of plots of more than twelve
manza7zas. Most comunevos received plots that would only guarantee subsistence production
while allowing for minimal commercial cropping. Nevertheless, many insiders, as well as
some outsiders, benefited disproportionately from the land partition. See "Libro de
registro de la comunidad de Dolores Izalco," i89i, AGN-CM-MG; and "Comunidad de
Dolores Izalco, comuneros titulados por Sime6n Moran," i898, AGN-CG-SO. Another
list from i89i shows i64 untitled possessors in Dolores; "Libro de registro de posedores de
terrenos comunales de Dolores i Asunci6n," i89i, AGN-CG-SO.
merpartidor Simeon Moran and i5o other comunerossigned a petition request-

ing that a June I, i895, decree allowing the nearby Indian community of Asun-
cion more time to partition their land be extended to cover Dolores as well.44
Morain's faction requested and received governmental support to name a sur-
veyor and continue with the partition.45 As a result of this new initiative,
Moran asked the recently elected governor to nullify the partition of com-
munal lands that Argueta had carried out in an area known as Rincon del
Tigre.46 Another group submitted a counterpetition, signed by 120 comuneros,
that accused Moran of having continued to assign lands "to his people" with-
out authorization. This group, which claimed to represent "the majority of the
comuneros,"demanded that Argueta (still legally the administrator) be allowed
to work with a surveyor and continue to partition not only unoccupied lands,
but those being litigated by Moran as well.47
Tensions heightened when a large group requested titles to communal
land that they had previously been assigned but to which many had never
received the appropriate documentation. Moran convinced ioo of these com-
uneros to file a complaint against Argueta in which they accused him of hav-
ing sold off large portions of the community's idle lands and of harassing
those who had already possessed plots simply because they did not have
titles.48 This complaint was followed by a more extensive one in i896. This
time Moran and 6o comuneros,who asserted that they had legal title to their
holdings, charged Argueta with having surreptitiously sold about four
caballerias (i8o hectares) of land to General Abraham Castillo Mora, a specu-
lator and regional strongman, in such a way so that it appeared that the title-
holders themselves had sold him these parcels. They also alleged that Argueta
then transferred 500 tareas (22 hectares) of their lands to Eliseo Godines, a
44. The decree was published in the Diar-ioOficial:"Los comuneros de Dolores Izalco
solicitan al Supremo Poder Ejecutivo haga extenciba al comu'n a que pertenecieron el
decreto de iro de junio del afnocorriente," I895, AGN-CM-MG.
45. "Luciano Argueta y varios vecinos de la ciudad de Izalco en concepto de
comuneros que fueron de la extinguida comunidad de Dolores solicitan del Spmo. Gobno.
se digne prorrogar por dos meses el tiempo que se design ... para el nombramiento del
ingeniero," I895, AGN-CG-SO.
46. "El sefnorLuciano Argueta de Izalco denuncia a Sime6n Moran porque esta
estendiendo titulos de terreno el punto 'Rinc6n del Tigre,"' 2I Aug. I895, AGS.
47. "Solisitud de varios vecinos y comuneros de Dolores Izalco relativaa que se nombre
juez y partidorde varios terrenos que han quedado sin repartir,"I895, AGN-CG-SO.
48. "Varioscomuneros de Dolores Izalco se quejan de que el Sr. Luciano Argueta esta
despojando de sus terrenos a los poseedores que no tienen titulos mediante una
contribuci6n,"I895, AGN-CG-SO.
ladino who worked as secretary to the local judge, by registering the title
under the name of Godines's aide. In addition, Argueta was accused of feigning
the sale of two other plots of i,ooo and 6oo tareas (44 and 26.4 hectares, respec-
tively). The aggrieved comunerosclaimed that they had been threatened with
jail by Godines, "who given his position does whatever he desires." Given that
the governor of Sonsonate who held their titles would not return them, the
comunerossought justice at a higher level, taking their claim directly to the
president.49
In the mayor's follow-up report to the president in regard to this complaint,
he reported that most of the people whose names appeared in the document
presented by Morain had disavowed their signatures. The two comuneroswho
acknowledged having "given authority to the plebe to complain to the president
of the Republic,"said that they were opposed to General Carlos Zepeda, a ladino
speculator, and not to Argueta. Moreover, they mentioned that the president
had already solved their land problem one year earlier.50To add to the confu-
sion,rZepeda's name also appeared on Morain'spetition. Another comunerowho
denied having signed the petition revealed that he had in fact received his lands
from Moran i5 years previously and had no complaints. The only irregularity
mentioned in the follow-up report was that one comunerohad sold 500 tareas(22
hectares) when he only had rights to 200. Moreover, if comuneroshad indeed sold
four caballer/asto General Castillo Mora, the transaction was perforce illegal,
given that parcels of this size could never have been possessed and titled in the
first place.51 Godines went far in defending his reputation, offering in evidence
the titles to lands he had previously purchased from comuneros,and claiming his
right to expel those who laid claim to his lands. Yet at least one of those he had
expelled also had his own title for some of the disputed 500 tareas. The mayor
warned the ministry that there were certain ladinos who made a living by
exploiting the presumed ignorance of the Indians, "making them believe that by
presenting four lies to the executive, he is going to give them back the same lots
that these very same unfortunate individuals had sold in the past, perhaps even
following the dictates of their own leaders.''52
49. "Queja presentada ante el Supremo Poder Ejecutivo por varios indigenas de Izalco
contra Luciano Argueta .. . por despojo de sus terrenos,' I896, AGN-CG-SO.
50. "Solicitud al gobernador de Sonsonate," i888, AGS.
5I. Castillo Mormn'sclaim is supported by other documentation in which he presents
the titles to four caballerias(each of 64 manazanas)
purchased from four comuner-os to whom
he had given title; see "Proceso sobre ocupaci6n ilegal de terrenos en El Volcan," I900,
AGN-CM-MG.
52. "Queja presentada ante el Supremo Poder Ejecutivo por varios indigenas de Izalco
contra Luciano Argueta ... por despojo de sus terrenos," I896, AGN-CG-SO.
Ten years after Morainwas removed as partidor,complaints against him

continued to mount. In i896 a comunerawrote to the governor, accusing
Morainof having given her lands to others. She also made a broader claim
against Morainwhen she asserted that "manypeople have relied on Simeon
Moran to acquiretitles based on time-honored possession and he is arbitrarily
chargingmoney for these transactions. . . [he demands]so much that Linares
Recinos was charged I50 pesos for his title, but he refused to pay and they did
not put him on the list [of those who were to receive titles]. As this is a crimi-
nal abuse and fraud, I denounce him before your authority.'53
Finally, in 1897 President Gutierrez issued a decree conceding that part
of the partition carried out by Morain was invalid. The decree allowed for
the legal certification of incomplete titles that had been granted before i897
and made provisions for comuneroswho had been excluded from the initial
allotments carried out by Morain. As of August I897, 248 comuneroshad been
granted titles based on land assignments that Morain had made years earlier.
The size of their parcels ranged from 4 to 28 manzanas (2.8 to i9.6 hectares)
and averaged about 6.7 manzanas (4.7 hectares).54 Those comuneroswho pos-
sessed untitled parcels could now legalize their holdings. The government also
reversed a section of the i89i decree according to which land that had not
been titled or partitioned would revert to the state if not titled within six
months. Under the 1897 decree, all unpartitioned land was ceded to the
comuneros so that they might distribute it to the landless. This decree also
allowed for some of these lands to be sold to outsiders in order to pay for
expenses. As another fund-raising measure, individual comuneroswould have to
pay the governor two pesos to acquire individual titles. The decree appointed
Carlos Zimmerman, a government surveyor, to survey community lands and
complete the partition.55 At long last it seemed that the community of Dolores
would be able to divide its remaining lands and provide all comuneroswith
appropriate titles.
Not surprisingly, Zimmerman encountered myriad problems when he
attempted to survey and distribute the community's remaining lands. Not the
least was opposition from Morain. Soon after he began the survey, Zimmerman
53. "La sefiora Guillerma Arevalo vecina de la ciudad de Izalco denuncia a Sime6n
Moran administradorque fue de la comunidad de Izalco,"22 Aug. i896, AGS.
54. "Protocolo de tftulos revalidados de la comunidad de Dolores Izalco," i897,
AGN-CG-SO.
55. "Los sefiores Sime6n Moran ... [todos] vecinos de Izalco piden se sefiale el dia en
que se comiense a realizar los titulos de la comunidad de Dolores," I897, AGN-CG-SO.
5 14 HAHR / August / Lauria-Santiago
complained to the governor that Moran would not hand over the titles to the
communal lands. Indeed, Moran was so intent on keeping the titles in his pos-
session that he even hired a legal adviser to help him. To complete his survey,
therefore, Zimmerman was forced to rely on lists held by the governor that
identified those comuneroswho had received land but who had no title, as well
as those who had no land at all.56Making sense of all previous partitions, allo-
cations, titles, and registry books was a complicated task. Zimmerman found
that Moran had given land and title to 299 comuneros.Another 213 appeared in
previous ledgers as having land but no legal title, while an additional 384
appeared -as having no lands at all (even though they undoubtedly possessed
lands that they had not officially received). Moran protested against the redis-
tribution and even accused the mayor of trying to take his land and give it to
others. In response, the mayor reminded the minister that Moran had been
removed from office, tried, and even jailed for his irregular administration of
community lands between i88i and i886. He also mentioned a list of illegal
titles that Moran had issued and that were held by the governor; he requested
that these titles not be confirmed.57
In addition to extensive internal problems over the partition of its lands,
the community of Dolores faced numerous external problems. Difficulties
with ladino entrepreneurs and neighboring peasant communities contributed
to the conflicts and the eventual outbreak of violence. Anticipating that his
attempt to set boundaries would be opposed by neighboring landholders,
Zimmerman prudently asked the community elders of Dolores and all ex-
partidores to accompany him in his boundary survey. One of the most poten-
tially violent disputes involved the border with Nahuizalco, an adjoining
Indian community and municipality that had a long history of conflicts with
both Dolores and Asuncion. For example, in 1893 a group of Izalco peasants
were harassed by an armed "gang" from Nahuizalco. Izalco's mayor com-
plained to the governor and asked him to order the mayor of Nahuizalco to
end the harassment.58 Fearing that the presence of all 6oo comuneros from
Dolores would provoke a confrontation, Zimmerman asked the governor to
56. Ing. Carlos Zimmerman to Governor of Sonsonate, leg. of letters, i898,

AGN-CG-SO.
57. "Partici6n de los terrenos comunales de Dolores Izalco," i890, AGN-CG-SO.
Unlike in previous documents, here all the comuner-oslisted were men.
58. "Variosindividuos comuneros de Dolores de la ciudad de Izalco se quejan de que
Juan Tino, Manuel Lue ... y Blas Shul que encabezan una pandilla, los perturban en el
ejercicio de sus derechos," I893, AGS.
assign 30 soldiers to assist him in surveying the border with Nahuizalco.59

Even well after the survey, in i899, peasants from Nahuizalco would continue
to contest Izalco's claims by invading lands along the border and asserting that
instead of honoring titles or recognizing the courts, "they would fix everything
with their machetes."60
In addition to the problems brought about by conflict with Nahuizalco,
there were other difficulties. Some neighboring hacendados as well as leaders
of other communities refused to participate in the survey. For example, at
first the representatives of the bordering community of El Volcain de Santa
Ana did not show up, nor did Emilio Araujo, owner of the hacienda of El
Sunza.61 Araujo refused to recognize Zimmerman's right to set the boundary,
and asserted that a previous inspection ordered by the Juzgado General de
Hacienda had reviewed the communal titles of Dolores when it established the
existing border.62 All of these obstacles caused considerable delays. To make
59. The Indians of Izalco's indigenous communities had a history of bitter

confrontations with the Indian community of Nahuizalco over the determination of
boundaries and the use of unclaimed land that lay between both towns. The conflicts dated
as far back as I849, when a survey of the border came close to precipitating a violent clash.
See "Nota manifestando que las comunidades de Izalco y Nahuizalco es necesario que
suspenda sus actitudes hostiles y recomienda tomar medidas convenientes para evitar una
asonada,"I849, AGN-CC, MI.I2, exp. io8. There is also evidence of some friction
between Izalco's two Indian communities; see "Los vecinos de Asunci6n Izalco han
presentado ante el Supremo Gobierno quejas de exesos por parte de los vecinos de
Dolores," 2 Apr. I852, AGN-CPC.
6o. Governor of Sonsonate, "Carta al alcalde de Izalco sobre usurpaci6n de terrenos
cometidas por los indigenas de Nahuizalco," 23 Mar. i899, AGN-CG-SO. In a similar
boundary conflict, 30 peasants from El Volcin de Santa Ana complained to the Supremo
Poder Ejecutivo that comunerosfrom Izalco were farming their lands. On this occasion the
mayor of Izalco proved that the three caballeriasin question were within the boundaries of
Izalco and that the community had left these lands undivided so that they might be used
"for common purposes."See "Solicitud al Supremo Poder Ejecutivo por los miembros de
la extinguida comunidad de ladinos de El Volcin de Santa Ana sobre tierras,"i896,
AGN-CM-MG.
6i. The Indian peasants of Izalco had also engaged in a series of border conflicts with
the ladino community of El Volcin de Santa Ana; see "Solicitud al Supremo Poder
Ejecutivo por los miembros de la extinguida comunidad de ladinos de El Volcin de Santa
Ana sobre tierras,"i896, AGN-CM-MG.
62. Eugenio Araujo had litigated with the community of Dolores Izalco over the
boundary line between his hacienda and their communal lands. According to sources cited
by Zimmerman, Araujo'sstone wall extended 6o to 8o meters into communal lands that
were marked off by an older boundary stone. The hacienda of El Sunza was originally part
matters worse, Zimmerman died before he could complete the survey and,
despite various requests by community leaders, the government did not
replacehim. With Zimmerman'sdeath any hopes for a negotiated solution to
the land disputesamong the comunero factionsof Dolores dwindled;as a result,
a significantportion of its land was left in the possession of many ladino peas-
ants and farmersfrom neighboring municipalities.As the community'sinter-
nal divisionsgrew,it only became easierfor aggressiveneighborsto seize more
portions of the community'slands.
Previous to these disputes, dozens of farmersfrom the region had rented
community land and built up valuablecommercial farms. But it was not only
neighboring landownerswho were interested in contesting Indian interpreta-
tions of boundarymarkersor survey maps; local officials, lawyers, and mili-
tary officers also attempted to take advantageof the partition of community
land by both fomenting and taking part in the internal disputes. Well before
i880, the ladino presence in Dolores had been established, not only after
decades of interethnic competition over land rights and local power, but also
as the result of Indian-ladino collaborationin municipal government as well
as Indian participationin commercialagriculture.Thus well before the parti-
tion process began, ladino peasants, farmers, and officials had established a
presence in the community life of Dolores. These included some farmersand
hacendadosfrom the municipalitiesof Izalco and Sonsonatewho rented com-
munity land, such as Benigno Barrientos,Domingo Arce, Wenceslao Herrera,
and General Carlos Zepeda.63In i889 the partidoryadministrador of Dolores
received permission from the Ministerio de Gobernaci6n to expel these ten-
ants from community lands. But some of them continued to press claims for
the lands they occupied and in all likelihood remained in possession of their
farms after the partition had been completed.64Typical of these men was
RupertoMachado,a local farmerwho was said to be a lawyer.He represented
Dolores as its scribe (escribiente)and benefited from Morain'squestionable
practices.65In I885 Moran paid Machado 4,200 pesos for representing the
of Los Lagartos, a colonial-era hacienda that spread over the municipalities of Izalco and
Caluco; see "Expediente de remedida de los linderos de Izalco y Caluco," I879, AGS.
63. "Partici6n de los terrenos comunales de Dolores Izalco," i890, AGN-CG-SO.
64. Jos6 Larreynaga,MeImoriade los actors delpoderejecutivoen el ramo de Gobernacion
duranteel afio de i889 (San Salvador:Impr. Nacional, I890), I38.
65. Machado had also unsuccessfully engaged in land litigation with peasants from
Cuisnahuat in i886. In that case, the minister of the interior forced him to give up his
claim; see Estupiniin, Memoria, 229.
Land, Community, and Revolt in Izalco 51r7
community in legal proceedings in San Salvador,and he was later accused of

having improperlygrantedMachado title to at least two caballer/asof land as
part of this deal.66Machado defended his rights by claiming that he had not
obtained the land from Moran, and that his i88o lease of these lands had in
fact constituted a sale. Like many other ladino tenants, Machado used his de
facto possession of rented lands as a basis for claiming legal title. In the con-
fusion and constant disputes over the privatization process, men like Mac-
hado and other tenants, including the mayor himself, most likely remainedin
control of at least portions of the lands they had been renting.67
General Castillo Mora was one of the few outsiders who actively and
openly speculatedin claims to communallands in Dolores.68He "purchased"
four caballer/as for 4,200 pesos; and although he claimed that he had bought
the land from four comuneros,it appears much more likely that it had been
given to him by Luciano Argueta, who at the time of the acquisition was par-
tidor of the community of Dolores. To avoid losing his holdings with no com-
pensation at all, Castillo Mora had to request assistance from the national gov-
ernment because a group of peasants from the nearby ladino community of El
Volcain de Santa Ana had invaded his property, distributed it among them-
selves, and had then begun to clear and plant the land. With his holdings both
occupied and surrounded by hostile peasants, therefore, Castillo Mora was
ironically forced to ask the government to buy his lands, which would then be
"granted" to the "usurpers.'69 The government's legal adviser who reviewed
this case decided that such a procedure would be unconstitutional, and sug-
gested that Castillo Mora be advised to take his case to the courts.
Another speculator, General Carlos Zepeda, had more success in obtain-
66. "Libro compuesto de 32 hojas tiles . . . para que el juez partidor de la comunidad
de indigenas de Asunci6n Izalco, seniorSime6n Tensu6n,ileve la cuente que le corresponded "
I885, AGS.
67. "Los infraescritos alcaldes de Dolores Izalco exponen que el administrador senior
Sime6n Moran no ha concluido ain la partici6n de nuestro terrenos municipales," I885,
AGS.
68. Castillo Mora had served as governor of Ahuachapin during I882. He was also
involved in a claim in Asunci6n Izalco, where he had purchased the claim to a valuable
farm that a comunerohad developed on communal lands.
69. Castillo Mora was also speculating in lands in Ataco (Ahuachapin). The governor
of the department of Ahuachapan opposed his claim against a group of "intrusos,"although
this same claim was later supported by the Ministerio de Gobernacion; see "Proceso sobre
ocupaci6n ilegal de terrenos en El Volcan," I900, AGN-CM-MG; and "Libro de acuerdos
del Ministerio de Gobernaci6n," I893, AGN-CM-MG.
51 8 HAHR / August / Lauria-Santiago
ing state assistance in a similar situation involving other nearby plots.70 Zepeda
was among the tenants who had attempted-and apparently succeeded-to
title the community lands he had leased, but for which he had not paid rent
since 1880.71 The lands had been taken over by peasants from both Izalco and
Nahuizalco. Like Castillo Mora, Zepeda probably had little chance of ever
regaining control of these lands. In part to resolve the conflict, but mostly as a
way of rewarding the ind/genas of Nahuizalco, who provided important militia
services to the state, in i899 the government paid Zepeda 30,000 pesos in
government bonds for six caballer/as (270 hectares) of land. The documents
drawn up for the sale failed to mention that Zepeda had been a tenant of
Dolores, and this fact was probably unknown to both the surveyor and local
government officials. The Indians themselves were perhaps unaware of the
exact terms of the transaction, although they probably would not have been
overly concerned that the government had effectively bribed Zepeda in order
to give them legal title to their land.
The parcels in question, located at a place known as Los Cuilotales, were
at first thought to be within the community of Nahuizalco. But later they were
found to be occupied by residents of both Dolores and Nahuizalco, the precise
boundary having been left open to local interpretation.72 The municipalities of
both Nahuizalco and Izalco had given out title to many of the peasants who
had taken possession of the lands that Zepeda had leased. Other peasants,
from Dolores, had received their documents in the partition carried out by
Moran, who allegedly issued titles from his house, without even visiting the
plots to see if previous possession had indeed been established. When the land
bought from Zepeda was surveyed, some adjacent lands were found to be held
by peasants who did not benefit from the government purchase and titling;
other nearby plots were in fallow and unoccupied. The surveyor measured and
titled a total of 55 plots, an effort that the ind/genas received "with joy.?73 But
when he reached the purchase size of six caballer/as,he abruptly stopped, leav-
ing unsurveyed (and hence untitled) 50 possessed plots.
In sum, the partition of the community lands of Dolores became a com-
plex struggle involving internal and external actors in a competition that did
not always follow predictable lines. But as the Indian peasants of Dolores
70. General Carlos Zepeda was governor and military commander of Sonsonate
during I894.
7I. "Partici6n de los terrenos comunales de Dolores Izalco," i890, AGN-CG-SO.
72. "Memorandumde la memoria del Ministro de Gobernaci6n,"i899, AGN-CM-MG.
73. "Mesura de los terrenos Los Cuilotales en Izalco y Nahuizalco," i899, AGN-
CG-SO.
struggledto retainsome control over the process,the politicalalliancesof their

factionalleaders became an importantcomponent of the struggle. The long-
standing entanglements of the residents of Dolores in regional and national
politicalstrugglesonly made the internalprocess of partitioningmore conflic-
tive and unpredictable,culminatingin the violent confrontationof i898.
The 1898 Revolt and Local and National Politics
It is evident that when factional strife in Dolores exploded into violence in

i898, the long and bitter disputefor control over the privatizationof commu-
nity lands was preeminent among the causes. But it would be a mistake to
attempt to interpret this intracommunityviolence (which was later perceived
as a conflict between Indian peasantsand ladino judges) without taking into
considerationeither the political alignmentsof the factions that faced off that
year or local perceptions of the confrontation. Indeed, it was not simply a
coincidence that the i898 confrontationtook place on the same night that the
government of President Gutierrez was overthrown by General Tomis Rega-
lado.74 The alliances forged by factions within the community of Dolores
extended far beyond the boundaries of local politics and tied the fate of both
sides to the success or failure of national political alliances. The Indian fac-
tions within Dolores had much to gain from aligning themselves with and
supporting national political and military leaders in their quest for executive
74. The same need to consider political alignments and local perceptions can be
said for interpretations of Regalado's rise to power. Some authors have characterized
Regalado's victory as representing the rise of El Salvador's coffee oligarchy to power.
Coffee exporters-a small portion of the country's elite-opposed President Guti6rrez's
tax on coffee exports at a time when coffee prices had dropped and government revenue
was sagging. This stance has been cited as evidence in interpretations of Regalado's
overthrow of Gutierrez as a defense of the coffee oligarchy and his regime, as well as
having initiated a "pax coffeana," in which all political conflict among elites was
contained by their desire for economic stability. See Robert G. Williams, States and Social
Evolution:Coffeeand the Rise of National Governmentsin CentralAmerica (Chapel Hill:
Univ. of North Carolina Press, I995), chap. 6; and Hector Lindo Fuentes, Weak
Foundations:The Economyof El Salvador in the Nineteenth Century(Berkeley: Univ. of
California Press, i990). The complex political alliances and factionalism of this period
plus the limitations of the central state's ability to intervene in local land and labor
disputes on the side of local elites sheds doubt on the thesis that state rule was
committed to unwavering support of a tightly knit economic oligarchy based on coffee
export. Other factors clearly played an important role in elite support for Regalado's
overthrow of Gutierrez.
power. Without a discussion of the links between the cormuneros of Dolores

and outside political factions and the state, the story of this village's divisive
history up to the violence of i898 would remain incomplete. It is therefore
necessary to understand the connections between communities such as this
one and the military men struggling for control of the national state. The fac-
tional and clientelistic basis of national politics in nineteenth-century El Sal-
vador meant that political leaders, including military officers, had to develop
power bases that combined corporate, ethnic, personalist, ideological, regional,
national, and even extranational ties and alliances. Since the i820S, Indians
from Izalco had established important precedents by participating in the wars
and statewide politics that characterized nation-state formation in El Salvador.
These alliances ranged from support for Guatemala's frequent invasions of
western El Salvador to participation in efforts to remove presidents from
power. In the period just before the i898 revolt, Indian militias from Izalco
had participated in the successful overthrows of Presidents Zaldivar (i885)
and Ezeta (i894).75 In many cases military units identified with and were loyal
to their place of origin and were likely to reflect the political affiliations of
their home bases.76 Often these very same militias mobilized, either indepen-
dently or in alliance with other forces, as most likely occurred during the vio-
75. During 1833 and as part of widespread resistance to Jefe de Estado Mariano
Prado's implementation of new taxes, the Indians of Izalco revolted and raided the city of
Sonsonate; see Francisco J. Monterrey, ed., Historiade El Salvador:anotacionescronol6gicas,2
vols., 2d ed. (San Salvador:Editorial Universitaria, 1977-78), 1:225. As part of later
conflicts, in 1846 militias from Izalco defeated General Ignacio Malespin and his faction as
they attempted to overthrow the government; see "Carta sobre confrontamiento entre los
Izalquefios y las tropas de Malespin," 26 Nov. 1846, AGN-CC, MI.12, exp. 182; and Rafael
Reyes, Nocionesde historiadel Salvador(San Salvador:Impr. del Dr. Francisco Sangrini,
i885), 502-3. On 12 Aug. 1872 Indians from Izalco revolted as part of another wave of
unrest among mostly Indian communities that spread throughout the country in the wake
of the repression of an uprising in Cojutepeque; see BoletinOficialno. 74 (28 Sept. 1872).
Izalco's Indians also participated in a smaller confrontation during March 1875 when they
assaulted their town's garrison to protest the municipality's decision to declare some
contested communal plots part of the municipal ejido; see Hubert Howe Bancroft, Histowy
of CentralAmerica,vol. 3: I80I-I887 (San Francisco: History Company Publishers, 1887),
400. On the i885 and 1894 mobilizations, see Duke to Porter, 28 May i885, United States,
Department of State, Dispatches from U.S. Consuls in San Salvador,USNA; and
Alejandro Orellana and Carlos Orellana, Sonsonatehistdricoe informzativo (San Salvador:
Impr. Nacional, I960), 5i.
76. Gustave de Belot, La Republiquede Salvador(Paris: Chez Duntu, Libraire, i965),
33; Foote, Recollectionsof CentralAmerica,6i; and GacetaOficial9, no. 58 (24 Apr. i86i): 3.
lence of i898. The militia experience of peasants from Dolores is indicated by

the fact that the leaders of the opposition to Morain signaled their attack with
a trumpet.
The ability of peasants and their communities in western El Salvador
either to act in autonomous uprisings or as allies of national political factions
rested upon a variety of factors. Because of its proximity to the Guatemalan
border, the western region had always been of strategic importance, as both the
Salvadoran and Guatemalan governments competed there for support. Indians
were also the favored recruits for El Salvador's army and militia units, a fact
that gave indigenous communities some bargaining leverage, despite the fact
that Indians were often forcibly pressed into service.77 Indian militias, aware of
their strategic importance to national factions, used this to extract favors from
government authorities, giving them an advantage over other communities or
even over competing groups within their own communities. Within Dolores,
comunerosupport for one or another national faction did not necessarily imply
adherence to the ideological or political goals of particular leaders or groups.
Rather, the numerous petitions to regional and national authorities regarding
internal land disputes suggests that comunerofactions offered political and mil-
itary support more with the expectation that they would receive a favorable
hearing of future claims than because of any ideological commitment. This was
likely the reason behind Moran's support of General Toma's Regalado, who
rose to power and became the provisional president in i898. Moran's power
had been curtailed under President Gutierrez, whose administration supported
the partitioning efforts of Argueta and Zimmerman. Unfortunately for Moran,
his family members, and associates, they were not allowed to enjoy the fruits of
their alliance with the victorious Regalado.
Regalado was a local military officer who contended for national power.
In i894 he participated in the overthrow of President Ezeta, and he expected,
though he did not receive, the presidency.78 As was typical of presidential tran-
77. Izalquefios had been recruited into the army for decades; see de Belot, La
Republiquede Salvador.
78. Regalado was kept from the presidency by a more powerful liberal faction led by
Prudencio Alfaro; see Italo L6pez Vallecillos, El periodismoen El Salvador(San Salvador:
UCA Editores, 1974). David Luna identifies Regalado'srise to power with the end of the
tradition of "progressive liberalism."Although Regalado came to power in opposition to
important liberals, I would question whether this faction ever ruled or was as radical as
Luna and Vallecillos claim, despite its stronger connections with liberal artisans and
peasants. Further research is necessary into Gutierrez's administration (1894-98) in order
sitions during the nineteenth century, Regalado's revolt against President

Gutierrezincited divisiveconflict not only in Izalco, but throughoutthe coun-
try. In many towns ethnic tensions worsened as Indians and ladinos aligned
with or againstthe new government.79After the fighting Regaladoseized the
presidency,which he usurped in hastily called and fraudulentelections, thus
provokingrenewed militaryand popularopposition to his government.80But
for those in western El Salvador,Regalado was not simply another general
vying for nationalpower;he was also a local landownerwho residedin the city
of Santa Ana and who owned a hacienda in Izalco.81When Morainand his
to establish the relation between political ideology and policy during this period. Patricia
Andrews, the only author who has written about this period in some detail, actually
characterizes Gutierrez as a conservative; see David Luna, "Anilisis de una dictadura
fascistalatinoamericana: MaximilianoHernindezMartinez,1931-1944," La Universidad
(San Salvador) 94, no. 5 (i969); and Patricia Andrews, "El liberalismo en El Salvador a
finalesrdelsiglo XIX,"Revistadel PensamientoCentroamericano 36 (i98i): 172-73.
79. For events in Santiago Nonualco, see Pifieda Alvarado, Resefiahist6ricade Santiago
Nonualco,14-i6. For La Libertad, see A. Molina Guirola (Governor of La Libertad) to
Ministro de Gobernaci6n, report, 9 Feb. i899, AGN-CM-MG.
8o. Regalado received about 6oo votes in Izalco (there were no other presidential
candidates) at a time when Izalco had about 2,000 potential voters; see "Electoral
Results," i899, AGN-CM-MG. National liberal leaders questioned an electoral process
in which Regalado was the only presidential candidate. In Usulutin a revolt broke out
against his election, while "armed actions" were carried out in Sensuntepeque and
Ilobasco; see R. Orellana (Governor of Usulutin) to Ministro de Gobernaci6n, report, 9
Feb. i899, AGN-CM-MG; and M. A. Castafieda (Governor of Cabafias) to Minstro de
Gobernaci6n, report, 26 Jan. i899, AGN-CM-MG. A few months after the initial wave
of opposition, General Pedro Escal6n led another unsuccessful armed revolt against
Regalado whom Escal6n would successfully overthrow in a second revolt in 1903; see
Antolin Olarro (Governor of Cabafias) to Ministro de Gobernaci6n, report, 5 Aug. i899,
AGN-CM-MG.
8i. The Regalado family owned the Hacienda San Isidro, formerly known as El
Potrero, which had originally been part of the sixteenth-century hacienda Los Lagartos.
They purchased it from the Barrientos family of Izalco. For information on the
Regalado family, see Santiago I. Barbarena, Monografiasdepartamentales:departanmento de
Santa Ana (San Salvador: n.p., I9I0); L. A. Ward, ed. and comp., Libro azul de El
Salvador (San Salvador: Bureau de Publicidad de la America Latina, I9I6); Director,
Asociaci6n Cafetalera de El Salvador to Subsecretary of Agriculture, 28 Jan. 1931,
AGN-CM-MG; Governor of Santa Ana, "Datos para el Anuario Americano," 2 Dec.
I9I6, AGN-CM-MG; Gerardo Martinez Funes, Album de San Salvadory Santa Ana
(Santa Ana: n.p., I938); and Joaquin Leiva, The Republicof El Salvador in Central
America (Liverpool: Barber, 1913). The Regalado family was involved in a dispute with
peasant landholders in Chalchuapa. On their conflict with Indian peasants in Ishuatin,
associates aligned themselves with Regalado they mobilized networks of polit-

ical alliances that for years had tied Izalco's factions to different elite con-
tenders for power.
Those close to the events of i898 highlighted the political nature of the
confrontation. One account, written soon after the events by a parish priest
from Cojutepeque, attributed the violence to competition among national
political factions. "The Indians of Izalco," he said, "numbering about 200, took
advantage of the lack of a garrison . .. [and] began to break down doors and
burn the archive; and there was a fight between them and a few Regalistas who
were heading toward Santa Ana, which resulted in about ten or twelve dead and
many wounded.'82 A few years later, the governor of the department of Son-
sonate reinforced this view when he explained, in a manner typical of ladinos
when referring to Indian violence, that the events were the result of outsiders
who exploited Indian ignorance. The governor's account emphasized that the
attack had targeted supporters of General Regalado's bid for presidential power
and perhaps given this change in focus, the victims had now become ladino:
a mob of Indians of an opposing band headed out to cut off a large

number of ladinos who were heading to San Salvador to join the forces
of General Regalado as a result of the political events of that year that
brought him to power; an encounter [took place] that left several
people dead and wounded, demonstrating the tragic consequences of
the spirit of party affiliation when inculcated in the ignorant masses,
who without hesitation set out to commit criminal acts, only for
individual [leaders], without following any personal ideals that could
bring them any advantage.83
But the category of ladino itself was fluid, for both outsiders and the
cornuneros of Dolores. Thus, for many of them Morain and his faction quickly
see "El Sr. Ignacio se queja de que el alcalde de Ishuatin a mandado sitarlo para que
como jornaleros valla a los trabajos de la finca del General Regalado," I896, AGN-
Secci6n Tierras, leg. 2, doc. 55. Regalado's victory also has been interpreted by
historians as a decisive transition to oligarchic rule. His reliance on popular support and
mobilization casts some doubt on these views.
82. Jose Maria Martinez, "Hist6ria de Cojutepeque,"in Papeleshistoricos, ed. Jose
Manuel Gallardo (Santa Tecla: Ed. L6a, 1978), 296.
83. Governor of Sonsonate, "Informe de la visita oficial a los pueblos del
departamento,"20 Sept. 1913, AGN-CG-SO.
became ladinos. Just two years after the i898 confrontation a group of ind/genas
who complained to the national government of the many abuses they had suf-
fered at the hands of ladinos, and whose lands were the "object of their exces-
sive greed," remembered Morain and his allies as ladinos who had been killed
for taking away their lands.84 In the minds of these comruneros, Indians became
ladinos when they actedlike ladinos, and thus they stripped away Morain'sethnic
identity with a polarized and politicized definition of Indianness. By aligning
himself in the land struggle with the faction that was perhaps more closely tied
to ladino forces outside of Dolores, Morain and his supporters had broken with
their Indian identity and opened themselves up to being censured and labeled
as ladinos.85 Nevertheless, the local factions cut across class and ethnic lines.
Indians and ladinos, as well as community leaders and entrepreneurs, often
found themselves on the same side during this confrontation, which until now
has been understood as having pitted Indian peasants against ladino agents of
the liberal state. For example, among those who attacked Morain was Pedro
Bolafios, a community leader who initiated many of the complaints and peti-
tions over land. Bolafios also led the opposition to the titling of plots by the
mayor of Izalco and he had hidden the community's land titles. The cross-class
and interethnic nature of the struggle is exemplified by the fact that siding with
the Indian leader Bolafios was Calixto Vega, a ladino who was one of Izalco's
more successful landowners and commercial entrepreneurs.86
After i898, factional leaders continued to petition the government over
the partition of community lands, but there were no significant changes. For
example, in i900 a total of 50 comruneros from both of Izalco's indigenous com-
munities asked the National Assembly to resurvey the borders of their former
communal lands. The petitioners did not mention the long history of intra-
community conflict and wrote as if the lands had remained intact and undi-
vided, when in fact most plots had been held privately for years. The National
Assembly forwarded the request to the president's office without any apparent
84. "Los sefiores Pedro Bolafios, Domingo Huela, Marcelino Felilo, Obispo Mayo y
Nicomedes G6mez se han quejado al Supremo Poder Ejecutivo como indigenas que
pertenecieron a la comunidad de Dolores Izalco de que varios ladinos avecinados ...
I900, AGN-Sec. Tierras, leg. 3/4, doc. 2.
85. Greg Grandin discusses a similar reversal in the popular memory of struggles over
land and local power in Cantel, Guatemala; see Greg Grandin, "The Strange Case of 'La
Mancha Negra': Maya-State Relations in Nineteenth-Century Guatemala,"HAHR 77
('997)-
86. See C. Varaona (Governor of Sonsonate) to Ministro General, 22 Nov. I898,
AGN-CG-SO.
result. Again in I903, Bolafios and his supporters petitioned the recently inau-
gurated president, General Pedro Jos6 Escalon (I903-7), for a new surveyand
partition. They denied that they were quarrelsome, or that they wanted to
recover their ancient communal lands by dislodging neighboring hacendados;
what they wanted, they claimed, was "justice."This group of Indians promised
Escalon that if he supported them they would become his "faithful supporters"
and stand next to him in defending liberty. The group included 30 people who
identified themselves as members of the "former community of indigenas."
This time the dossier (which did find its way into the president's office) nar-
rated the procedures and problems of the preceding years, including Zimmer-
man's efforts to reestablish village boundaries.87
Although the pleas of local Indians to the national government to reopen
the partition of lands fell on deaf ears, the mayor of Izalco reinitiated the parti-
tion by starting to title existing plots. This effort, however, still reflected the
continuing divisions within the local Indian population. The mayor hoped to
complete Zimmerman's work, and to do so he made use of a map and list that
the surveyor had made. The material showed the plots possessed by the 303
comunerostitled by Moran, the land of 2I3 comruneros who had been left without
title, and the possessions of 82 non-comunerotenants who had not paid rent since
i882; Zimmerman's material also listed the 384 individuals who had received
neither land nor title.88 In response to the mayor's actions, a group of comuneros
led by Bolafios, and claiming to be acting as representatives of the community,
asked the governor to enjoin the mayor from distributing titles to others,
although at the same time they requested that their own holdings be given legal
title. The mayor defended his actions by explaining that it was the only way to
resolve the great confusion of claims and that he was not selling plots but only
providing titles to existing holders. Some of the current holders, he asserted,
had been harassed and intimidated by the complainants, whom the mayor
accused of redistributing lands that had already been partitioned and titled.
They had acted in concert with armed comunerosand had provoked "judicial
87. "Solicitud de varios vecinos de los valles de 'El Chorro,' 'Matazano,' 'Cruz
Grande,' 'Teshacalate'. . . que comprendian antiguamente la comunidad de Dolores Izalco,
sobre que se les remidan sus propiedades por encontrarse muy obscuros los titulos antiguos
de terrenoscomunalesdadosa los naturalespor mandatorealen 1582," 15 Apr.I90I, AGN-
CM-Asamblea Legislativa; and "Variosindigenas de Izalco que haga la partici6n de los
terrenos que pertenecieron a la extinguida comunidad de Dolores," 1904, AGN-CM-MG.
pertenecieron a la extinguida comunidad de Dolores," 1904, AGN-CM-MG.
disputes and disagreements" within the village. The governor sided with the
mayor and accepted his explanation of his actions and his opposition to Bolafios.
Nevertheless, Bolafios and his followers continued to ask the national
government to intervene. In I904 they again petitioned for the orderly dis-
tribution of whatever communal lands might still remain unassigned. They
requested that a surveyor be appointed to serve as partidory admninistradorin
order to resolve pending matters and represent "a [legally] abolished society in
the process of being liquidated."89This time they accompanied their petition
with a long account of the conflicts in Dolores and of the "thievery" of previ-
ous partidores who had distributed the lands in a most inequitable manner.
They recalled the difficulties they had encountered over lands that bordered
on neighboring haciendas, and they described how most of the 8o ladino ten-
ants who had farmed community lands before i88i had attempted to title the
lands they rented. Bolafios claimed that he had respected Moran's partition as
long as no disputes emerged. In response to this petition, the National Assem-
bly asked the president to commission a new outside partidor, as Bolafios and
his followers had requested.90 The results of this decision remain a mystery,
although any revision of extant arrangements was unlikely after decades of
possession and occupation by indigenas and ladinos alike. Most of the complex
changes of the previous 20 years were irreversible. A few years later the com-
munity of Dolores ceased to appear in Izalco's documentary record.
Although there are few sources that provide information on the links
between Izalco and national factional leaders, the i898 "revolt" reveals an
important connection between the locally grounded context of Izalco's Indian
politics and the development of national politics.91 As the twentieth century
began, most of Dolores's comuneroswere able to retain access to and continue
farming parcels that had previously belonged to their community. But the par-
tition process itself, filtered through a community whose ethnic solidarity
had become compromised by commercial, ethnic, and political networks, also
weakened the internal cohesion of the community. Despite the rhetorical flour-
ishes by leaders who called for justice and fairness, all of the identifiable groups
89. Larreynaga,Memor-ia;and "Partici6n de los terrenos comunales de Dolores

Izalco," I890, AGN-CG-SO.
pertenecieron a la extinguida comunidad de Dolores," 1904, AGN-CM-MG.

9I. For a discussion of a case in which these connections are more evident, see Aldo
A. Lauria-Santiago, "Los indigenas de Cojutepeque, la poiftica faccional y el estado

nacional en El Salvador, 1830-1890," in Construccion de las identidadesydel estadomodernoen
CentroAmernica, ed. Arturo Taracena (San Jos6: UCA Editores; CEMCA; FLACSO, I995).
within Dolores seem to have behaved in a similar conflictive and competitive

fashion, although all managed to obtain the support of a significant number of
comuneros. In the end, privatization only served to reinforce the emerging dif-
ferentiation within both ladino and Indian peasant groups, while allowing var-
ious factional leaders and their closest allies to benefit unequally from the dis-
tribution of land and the sale of lots.
Conclusion
In land-wealthy communities like Dolores, in which intense ethnic rivalries,

expanding commercial agriculture, and important political alliances had already
created a complex maze of interests and alliances, the privatization of land has-
tened the weakening of indigenous solidarity. Indigenous communal organiza-
tion and identity suffered from the subordinate position of Indians in relation
to emerging ladino commercial and landowning elites. But this did not always
occur in a straightforward fashion. The partitioning process exacerbated
existing resentments toward ladinos of all classes, although it also encouraged
alliances between community factions and ladino entrepreneurs and political
actors (including military officers).92 The decades-old links of Izalco's Indian
communities to larger commercial networks and political alliances had already
set the stage for the conflicts that emerged during the privatization process.
The personal and kinship ties necessary for any form of communal cohesion
could not be easily maintained given the increasing number of community
members, the fixed resource base, the external pressures, and the nature of
political alliances forged during the i88os and i89os.
Although the privatization of community lands in Izalco created a landed
peasantry, it also led to competitive and conflictive land distribution among
community factions. At the same time, privatization reactivated and height-
ened conflicts with bordering haciendas and peasant communities while invit-
ing the participation of ladino peasants and elites, who both arbitrated and
took advantage of the complex maze of indigenous claims and counterclaims.
The privatization of communal lands debilitated the Indian communities of
Izalco. This eventually led to the disintegration of what was left of the com-
munity of Dolores during the early twentieth century. By I93 2 there was noth-
92. See, for example, "Los sefiores Indalecio Chilulum y Teodoro Gonzalez ... se
quejan de que el alcalde municipal ... di apoyo a Martin Sanches para que 6ste les
despoje,"20 Sept. i898, AGS.
ing left of this once prosperous Indian community, which by then had become
identified merely as a ladino barrio.93
While we should be careful not to generalize from the experience of
Dolores, many other Indian communities in El Salvador did indeed expe-
rience similar internal crises when faced with the privatization of their cor-
porate lands. Repeatedly, the commercial networks and political alliances
that these communities maintained with regional and national society were
crucial in determining how land was distributed and whether ethnic or cor-
porate solidarity survived. The partition process fostered endemic conflict
among cornunerosand weakened their ability to compete (or negotiate) with
ladinos for control over local resources and power. But conflicts over privati-
zation also demonstrated that the internal solidarity of Izalco's Indian com-
munities had already been weakened. This should force us to reconsider the
idea that Indian peasant communities of the nineteenth century retained the
politically autonomous character they had during the colonial period. By
the late nineteenth century, decades of change had already tied these com-
munities to larger political struggles and a new commercial economy that
involved new markets and entrepreneurs. This laid the foundations for poten-
tial challenges to the stability of hierarchies and ideologies internal to the
community.94
93. Thomas Anderson, Matanza: The CommunistRevoltof 1932 (Lincoln: Univ. of

NebraskaPress, 1971), ii0. However,the demiseof the indigenouscommunityof Dolores
and the decreasing number of individuals identified as Indians in the surviving indigenous
community of Asunci6n did not lead to a significant decline in the number of Izalquefios
identified as Indians in official sources. Demographic data from 1914 and 1915 indicate that
about 50% of all births were still classified as Indian; see "Libro de Actas Municipales,"
AMI, 1903-17.
94. The case of Izalco might provide both a confirmation and a variation on Jeff
Gould's findings in Matagalpa. Gould argues that once community authorities became
mediators between local people and the national state or regional landowners, the role of
violence and coercion increased, as these authorities were no longer able to rely on the
same kind of internal legitimacy. In Izalco the Indian communities had long lost their
"pristine"identity, when they were autonomous or acted independently of "outside" forces.
From this perspective, the confrontation of i898 and the demise of the community of
Dolores was the product of many decades of change, rather than just the challenges to the
community that were brought about by partitioning during the i88os and i89os. The
Indian community, as distinct from the ethnic identity of the Indians themselves, fell prey
both to its own contradictions and to the complex conjuncture of the end of the century.
See Jeffrey L. Gould, "'iVana Ilusi6n!' The Highlands Indians and the Myth of Nicaragua
Mestiza, i88o-1925," in Identityand Struggleat the Margins of the Nation-State: The Laboring
Peoplesof CentralAmericaand the HispanicCaribbean,eds. Aviva Chomsky and Aldo
Lauria-Santiago (Durham: Duke Univ. Press, i998).
After suffering through the conflictive process of privatization, the Indian

peasants of Izalco could not always count on community solidarity in their
efforts to organize in defense of their interests. For centuries the Indian com-
munity of Asuncion had relied upon its internal organization to see to it that
the subsistence needs of its members were met. But after privatization, the
community-damaged by its own divisions and conflicts-would organize
around a more abstract principle: a sense of identity based more on kinship
and political ties than on land ownership. A reduced core of indigenas based in
Asuncion continued to identify themselves as members of an Indian commu-
nity, even after the conflicts of the turn of the century and the dissolution of
the communally controlled lands and resources that had formed the basis of
Izalco communities for over two centuries. Until at least the I92os, Asuncion
continued to elect an Indian alcalde and regidores and identify itself as a
comunidad.95Yet their position within the larger political economy of the
region had changed drastically, and within their own municipality they were
now merely a minority group.96
The weakening and near dissolution of communal ties also undermined
the ability of Izalco's indigenous communities to act politically as strong aut-
onomous allies of larger elite-led factions. The weakening of the community
facilitated the privatization of political power, reducing community life to a
distorted, ritualized, and defensive function that became, by the I920S, one
more node in an emerging national political system based on patron-client
relations and the mobilization of votes, but not militias.97 During the first
decades of the twentieth century, community organization in Asuncion pro-
vided a means of generating Indian electoral support for presidential candi-
dates. But the possibility of autonomous military and political mobilization
had been eliminated. It was not until I93i and I932, in a vastly changed con-
95. In 1924 the community of Asunci6n claimed about 2 i0 adult males, which
represented a total community population of about 8oo (the total municipal population was
between17,500 and i9,000). They heldyearlyelectionsfor alcaldeandreportedto the
departmental governor; see Sotero Pasin to Governor of Sonsonate, 1924, AGS.
96. In 1905 community leaders, with the support of 8o comuneros,had to request
official permission for their fiestas; see "Solicitud de los indfgenas de Izalco a que se les
permita celebrar funciones religiosas y velaciones de las imagenes y patron del pueblo," 27
May 1905, AGN-CM-MG.
97. For discussions of the political role of Indians during the 1920S, see Patricia
Alvarenga, Culturay ftica de la violencia:El Salvador;i880- 1932 (San Jos6: EDUCA, i996);
Alan Everett Wilson, "The Crisis of National Integration in El Salvador, 1919-1935"
(Ph.D. diss, Stanford Univ., i969); and Anderson, Matanza.
text, that Izalco's indigenous leaders would again independently mobilize, this
time in a failed alliance with communist leaders.
Observers of Salvadoran history have often likened this country to Gua-
temala in their attempt to link the social origins of twentieth-century authori-
tarianism in both countries to coercive forms of labor recruitment or oligar-
chic landholding patterns.98 At the heart of these arguments lies an emphasis
on the emergence of an oligarchic elite that dispossessed the country's peas-
antry during the late nineteenth century. The repressive conditions in the
countryside have been seen as going hand in hand with what are considered
typically Salvadoran and Guatemalan forms of twentieth-century "reactionary
despotism." Yet these interpretations run against some of the evidence that has
emerged from empirical studies of local agrarian society in these countries.
98. Discussions of the origins of El Salvador'sauthoritarianpolitical culture-its

military-oligarchic regimes of the 1940s through the 1970s-have often been based on a
comparison of the five ex-federated Central American republics. During the i98os the
emergence of a seemingly comparable set of small, contiguous, agro-exporting countries
encouraged the application of sociostructural models to the origins of democracy and
authoritarianismin the region. See Enrique Baloyra, "ReactionaryDespotism in Central
America,"]ozurnalof Latin AmericanStudies 15 (i983), for the most developed discussion of
this latter tradition. For historical-sociological comparisons of the Central American
republics, see, for example, Jeffery M. Paige, "Coffee and Politics in Central America,"in
Crisisin the CaribbeanBasin, ed. Richard Tardanico (Newburry Park, Calif.: Sage
Publishers, i987); A. Douglas Kincaid, "AgrarianDevelopment, Peasant Mobilization, and
Social Change in Central America: A Comparative Perspective" (Ph.D. diss., Johns
Hopkins Univ., i987); David Kauck, "AgriculturalCommercialization and State
Development in Central America: The Political Economy of the Coffee Industry" (Ph.D.
diss., Univ. of Washington, i988); and Frederick Stirton Weaver, Insidethe Volcano:The
Historyand PoliticalEcononwy of CentralAmerica (Boulder: Westview Press, 1994). For the
most recent attempt at this comparative and structural approach, see Williams, Statesand
SocialEvolution.Many authors consider that El Salvador, along with Guatemala, followed a
"path"of sociopolitical development that was more weighted by its colonial past and that
led to the "retention" of colonial forms of labor coercion than occurred in other Central
American countries. See Anthony Winson, "The Formation of Capitalist Agriculture in
Latin America and Its Relationship to Political Power and the State,"ComparativeStudiesin
Societyand History 25 (i983); Edelberto Torres Rivas, Interpretacidn del desarollosocial
centroamericano: procesosy estructurasde una sociedaddependiente(San Jos6: Ed. Universitaria
Centroamericana, i98i); and Evelyn Huber and John D. Stephens, "Conclusion: Agrarian
Structure and Political Power in Comparative Perspective,"in Agrarian Structureand
PoliticalPower:Landlordand Peasantin the AIakingof Latin Amierica,eds. Evelyn Huber and
Frank Safford (Pittsburgh: Univ. of Pittsburgh Press, 1995). For a discussion of these views
in a comparative context, see Lowell Gudmundson, "Lord and Peasant in the Making of
Modern Central America,"in Huber and Safford, Agrarian Structureand PoliticalPower.
Land, Community, and Revolt In Izalco 531
0 5 10 Mi.
0 5 10O 1'5km.Ca \
OCA N"''''
g ACHUACHAPAEPATMETNL
\LIBERTAX D
: ~~~~~~~usnaut DEPARTMENT 2S
power to tranntasfor naonale s oy
PAP
CTIENT
9 ~ ~ ESONSCOEAT
N
Izalco~~wetr~ El Salvador.D DEPRTEN
Interpretationsof the January1 932 revolt that challenged the state'scon-

trol over much of western El Salvador have also emphasized either the massive
dispossessionand proletarianizationof the western peasantryor the conflicts
between Indians and terratenientes.100
Hector Perez summarizesthis perspec-
99. For an important reinterpretation of how the expansion of coffee affected the land
and labor of indigenous communities in Guatemala, see McCreery, Rural Guatemala,
1760-1940.
ioo. Among the authors who stress the "proletarian"character of the I932 revolt are
Paige, "Coffee and Politics"; and Leon Zamosc, "Class Conflict in an Export Economy:
tive in a recent review of the events of I93I-32. In his view, "El Salvador
became a showplace of well-kept coffee plantations, and the village Indians
and mestizos lost their lands (owing to laws from i88i and I882 abolishing
community-ownedlands)to privateownership.... Thus the lines were drawn
for a social and ideological conflict of huge proportions, between a growing
mass of dispossessedpeasantsimbued with the traditionof common access to
the land, and an elite class of entrepreneurswho, together with the govern-
ment, were bent on an almost unlimited expansionof agriculturalexports.'101
P6rez suggests that the roots of the revolt can be found in the "disposses-
sion" of landholdingpeasantsand Indiansthat occurred30 to 40 years earlier.
In addition,he and others have stressedthe role of communityand ethnic soli-
darity in bringing about Indian mobilization during the I93I-32 revolt.
Accordingly,the defense of community-defined as a singularinterest-was a
principal motivating force for the alliance between Indians and communists
that drove the revolt.102But most explanationsof these events departfrom the
assumptionof a polarizedcountrysidein which landlessworkers and Indians
confronted "junker"landlords or oligarchs, who are assumed to have domi-
nated the social, economic, and political life of ruralEl Salvadorsince at least
the i880S.103 These accountsof the late-nineteenth-centurypartitionof Indian
The Social Roots of the SalvadoranInsurrection of 1932," in Sociologyof "Developing

Societies":CentralAmerica,ed. Edelberto Torres Rivas (New York:Monthly Review Press,
i988). Other interpretations combine an emphasis on the role of community, ethnic
conflict, and national politics with attention to issues of land and labor. See, for example,
Mauricio de la Selva, "El Salvador:tres decadas de lucha,"CuadernosAmericanos120, no. I
(i962); Anderson, Matanza; and A. Douglas Kincaid, "Peasants into Rebels: Community
and Class in Rural El Salvador,"ComparativeStudiesin Societyand Histoiy 29 (i987). Among
more recent efforts at researching aspects of the revolt are Alvarenga, Culturay ftica;
Hector Perez Brignoli, "Indians, Communists, and Peasants: The 1932 Rebellion in El
Salvador,"in Coffee,Society,and Powerin Latin America,eds. William Roseberry, Lowell
Gudmundson, and Mario Samper Kutschbach (Baltimore:Johns Hopkins Univ. Press,
1995); and Erik Ching, "From Clientelism to Militarism: The State, Politics, and
Authoritarianismin El Salvador, i840-1940" (Ph.D. diss., Univ. of California, Santa
Barbara,1997), chap.7.
ioi. Perez Brignoli, "Indians, Communists, and Peasants,"240.
102. Kincaid, "Peasants into Rebels."
103. Besides challenging the myth of the dominant landowning oligarchy as an
explanation for the 1932 revolt, the evidence presented in this article also calls into
question the explanations offered by the leaders of the 1932 revolt themselves. Miguel
Marmol-a Communist activist and participant in the 1932 revolt-reported that Jose
Ama, an Indian leader of Izalco who was executed by local ladinos after the 1932 revolt,
had been tortured and all his lands had been taken by the Regalado family. Historians have
community lands and its impact on the peasantry in El Salvador have assumed
that it led to the massive dispossession of peasants. They have characterized it
as a land-grab led by coffee-producing elites who controlled the state.104The
Indian communities that had their lands privatized have often been presented
as internally homogeneous, historically invariable institutions, composed
either of victims of overwhelming external forces or of seething peasants wait-
ing to explode in revolt.105
However, the story of the i898 "revolt" told here-its origins and its
results-calls into question the terms in which the experience of Indians in
western El Salvador, at least in Izalco, has been framed by projecting back-
wards in time subsequent interpretations of later twentieth-century history.
Besides emphasizing the loss of land and the proletarianization of Indian
peasants, or the timeless, homogeneous sense of identity or cohesiveness of
Indian communities, historians will need to consider the impact of internal
taken this charge at face value, portraying the Regalados as rapacious local landowners
rather than a political faction with local allies. But in the context of the conflicted
distribution of community lands in Dolores and the alliances that emerged from this
process, the role of General Regalado and his local allies takes on a new light that requires
further research. Furthermore, the Ama family itself was deeply embroiled in the disputes
and conflicts of this period, with Ama'sfather or grandfather (who served as regidor of the
community of Dolores in i885) cited in one of the complaints against Correa for buying
"excessive"lands in i887. Jose Ama'sleadership position in the community of Asunci6n
Izalco during the 1920S was passed on to him by Patricio Shupan, his father-in-law. See
"Los individuos de la comunidad de indigenas de Dolores Izalco piden la remoci6n del
administradory Juez partidor Francisco Correa por cierto delitos que le han dennuciado,"
i887, AGN-CG-SO; Roque Dalton, Miguel Mawrmnoly lossucesosde I932 en El Salvador(San
Jose: EDUCA, i982), 346; and Anderson, Matanza.
104. The main contributions to the study of this process are Browning, El Salvador:
Landscapeand Society;Rafael Menjivar,Acumulacionoxriginaria y desa-rollodel capitalismoen El

Salvador(San Jos6: Ed. Universitaria Centroamericana, 1976); and Lindo Fuentes, Weak
Foundations.Browning and Menjivar tend to emphasize this perspective. More recently
Robert Williams reiterates this view in his Statesand SocialEvolution.
I05. This has also contributed to the perception that Indian peasants and their
communities failed to adjust or adequately respond to the requirements of a supposedly
ladino-dominated commercial economy. David Browning and Alejandro Marroquin
partially contribute to this view. See Browning, El Salvador:Landscapeand Society;and
Marroquin, "El problema indigena en El Salvador,"AmericaIndfgena35, no. 4 (1975), and
San PedroNonualco(San Salvador:Ed. Universitaria, n.d.). See also Aldo Lauria-Santiago,
"Los indigenas de Cojutepeque"; and Patricia Alvarenga, Culturay ftica, for a revaluation
of the political role of Indian and other peasant communities in the process of state
formation.
534 HAHR/ August / Lauria-Santiago
differentiation and of Indians' varying ties to ladino networks of power and

wealth. The research presented here will hopefully add some depth and
nuance to the discussions of the local origins of peasant political participation
and revolt in El Salvador. A view of western El Salvador's indigenous peas-
antry that does not take into account their own participation in the transfor-
mation of the region's political economy remains one-sided and incomplete-
no matter how contradictory the process or the results of their actions. The
ind/genas of Izalco-rarely acting as a single entity in the shifting arena of
local politics-had little choice when it came to the creation of specific gov-
ernmental agendas, but to a great extent they determined how these policies
were carried out. Throughout the privatization process the peasants of El
Salvador who identified themselves as ind/genas continued to act upon their
world in complex and contradictory forms, but certainly with more agency
than has been attributed to them previously.

Land, Community, and Revolt in Late-Nineteenth-Century Indian Izalco, El Salvador

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Land, Community, and Revolt in Late-Nineteenth-Century Indian Izalco, El Salvador

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Land, Community, and Revolt in Late-Nineteenth-Century Indian Izalco, El Salvador

Author(s): Aldo A. Lauria-Santiago

Instances of violence in the Indian communities of late-nineteenth-century

male Indianswere involved in the fighting, and at least 27 were capturedby

3. Abelardo Torres, "More from This Land,"TheAmericas14, no. 8 (i962): 9.

vador.By providinga close account of the internalconflicts and divisionsover

Ethnicity and Agrarian Society in Izalco

Izalco is one of the largest municipalities in western El Salvador. In the mid-

5. For discussions of Izalco's colonial history, see Murdo J. MacLeod, SpanishCentral

ture with commercialproductionbegan in the sixteenthcenturyand extended

reprinted in Boletznde la DireccidnGeneralde Estadisticade la Repiblicade El Salvador4, no. 2

includedall non-Indians,includingthose "formerIndians"who simply started

Nicolis Barrera(Alcalde of Izalco) to Governor of Sonsonate, report, 12 Dec.

1892,AGN-Colecci6n Gobernaciones-Sonsonate (hereafter AGN-CG-SO). This level of

reunited in a single municipality.17Still, despite the establishmentof a single

to clarifytheir holdings and distinguishthem from the municipalejidos,which

i9. "Documentaci6n de la solicitud de las comunas de Dolores y Asunci6n Izalco para

was controlled by the ladino municipal leaders.21 Privately owned haciendas

The Partition of Community Lands in Dolores Izalco

In i88i and i882, as part of its attempt to stimulate investment in commer-

29. "Solicitud al SPE sobre exijir al administrador Sime6n Moran la partici6n de la

extinguida comunidad de Dolores Izalco," I3 July 1885, AGN-CG-SO.

lished political alliances. In i885 a combination of popular revolts, factional

Ana, Nahuizalco, and Atiquizaya.31 These comuneroswere in effect allied with

34. "Solicitud al SPE sobre exijir al administrador Sime6n Moran la partici6n de la

Luciano Argueta, who served as the partidor y administrator of Dolores

42. "Variosindigenas de Izalco que haga la partici6n de los terrenos que

pertenecieron a la extinguida comunidad de Dolores," I903, AGN-Colecci6n Ministerios-

merpartidor Simeon Moran and i5o other comunerossigned a petition request-

Ten years after Morainwas removed as partidor,complaints against him

56. Ing. Carlos Zimmerman to Governor of Sonsonate, leg. of letters, i898,

assign 30 soldiers to assist him in surveying the border with Nahuizalco.59

59. The Indians of Izalco's indigenous communities had a history of bitter

community in legal proceedings in San Salvador,and he was later accused of

struggledto retainsome control over the process,the politicalalliancesof their

The 1898 Revolt and Local and National Politics

It is evident that when factional strife in Dolores exploded into violence in

power. Without a discussion of the links between the cormuneros of Dolores

lence of i898. The militia experience of peasants from Dolores is indicated by

sitions during the nineteenth century, Regalado's revolt against President

associates aligned themselves with Regalado they mobilized networks of polit-

a mob of Indians of an opposing band headed out to cut off a large

89. Larreynaga,Memor-ia;and "Partici6n de los terrenos comunales de Dolores

pertenecieron a la extinguida comunidad de Dolores," 1904, AGN-CM-MG.

A. Lauria-Santiago, "Los indigenas de Cojutepeque, la poiftica faccional y el estado

within Dolores seem to have behaved in a similar conflictive and competitive

In land-wealthy communities like Dolores, in which intense ethnic rivalries,

93. Thomas Anderson, Matanza: The CommunistRevoltof 1932 (Lincoln: Univ. of

After suffering through the conflictive process of privatization, the Indian

98. Discussions of the origins of El Salvador'sauthoritarianpolitical culture-its

Izalco~~wetr~ El Salvador.D DEPRTEN

Interpretationsof the January1 932 revolt that challenged the state'scon-

The Social Roots of the SalvadoranInsurrection of 1932," in Sociologyof "Developing

103. Besides challenging the myth of the dominant landowning oligarchy as an

Landscapeand Society;Rafael Menjivar,Acumulacionoxriginaria y desa-rollodel capitalismoen El

differentiation and of Indians' varying ties to ladino networks of power and

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen