19th-Century Changes in Argentina and effects on the gauchos

I read quite a few articles about the Argentinian cowboy, called a gaucho.  As part of my Latin American History class, I was able to scrape this short essay together (Although a bit bland, it is pretty interesting).  Enjoy!

Life of the gaucho underwent many changes in laws and society through the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Many of these changes sent the quality of gaucho life plummeting into an era of oppression and corruption. Major issues over land ownership as well as clashes between natives and immigrants fueled declines in gaucho life.

One major problem in the pampas that adversely affected the gaucho was that land became a monopoly, owned only by those of wealth. Although there were pre-designated rules as to how one could obtain land ownership, the rules were often broken. “Ownership remained the monopoly of… [the] elite that wielded the political clout to assure favorable land, labor, immigration, and tax policies.” (Slatta, 101) This left many rural natives without legitimate land to live on, making life very difficult. Government fought this corruption and worked to pass laws that were supposed to help rural natives have fair opportunities to gain land ownership. La aspiracion of Mercedes aired the need for a “home for our countrymen, for the gaucho.” The paper actively supported a legislative proposal for land grants on the frontier to the native-born “disinherited poor.” (La aspiracion) One such law put in place by the government to help the prominent issue was the Homestead Law of October 1884. Unfortunately, in a report of Minister of Agriculture Victorino de la Plaza, Godofredo Huss summarized the intent of the legislation as “an act of reparation for our gaucho, who had always been on the frontier defending the national honor and integrity.” But the law…turned out to be a grotesque parody of that inspiration and failed utterly to promote land subdivision. (Huss, Slatta 101) This seemed to be a common trend in “legislation… [which] usually suffered from inefficient or corrupt political administration. A built-in multiplier effect facilitated further land concentration by latifundists and speculators who wielded great political and economic influence throughout the nineteenth century. “ (Slatta, 104) Often times, those landowners considered among the wealthy were foreigners who cared little for cultivating the land for its maximum productivity. “Foreign agricultural colonists enjoyed access to land denied to the “poor shepherds and laborers” of the countryside.” (Revista del Plata, Slatta 97) In some cases, rural natives could work for the foreigners under contract, but the outcome often proved negative. Rural natives were deemed “ragged families”, subsisted in “ruined huts” because they realized the futility of building substantial homes, only to be turned out of them at the end of a rental contract. (Revista del Plata) This was only the start of the clash that soon appeared between the natives and the foreigners. Not everyone in government neglected to think of the gauchos. Nicholas Avellaneda stressed the importance of making the gaucho a property owner in order to curtail his wanderings and cool his “savage passions” in 1865, while writing on land reform. (Avellaneda)

“By 1914…the [Argentina] rural population of 923, 066 included… foreigners made up 30 percent of the total rural population…” (Argentine Republic) As more foreigners moved into the pampas, the gauchos found themselves in a world of change. “The pampa of cattle, gauchos, and estancias had become a plain of towns and immigrants.” (Slatta 164) Often times the gaucho would not only resent the foreigners, but exhibit ethnocentrism towards them. “The gauchos regard with a sort of pitying disdain the timid or unskilled horseman.” When Miller declined a proferred cigar, one gaucho remarked to another that the general “knows absolutely nothing; why, he cannot even smoke.” (Miller) In some cases, gauchos exhibited violent behavior towards foreigners. “At dawn on New Year’s Day 1872, the armed band invaded Independence Plaza in Tandil, shouting, “Long live the republic! Long live the religion! Death to gringos and Masons!” They then began “a murderous rampage….leaving behind a path of carnage-17 dead, 14 with slit throats.” (Del Valle) Issues revolving around land ownership and immigrants in the pampas fueled many of the negative changes that occurred in gaucho life during the nineteenth and twentieth century.

SOURCES:

Argentine Republic, Tercer censo nacional . . .1914, 2:219-220; Slatta 164

Avellaneda, Nicolas, Estudio sobre las leyes de tierras publicas, ppp. 146-147; Slatta 97

Del Valle, Recordando, 2: 520-522; Slatta 170-171

Huss, Godofredo, “Breve reseña de la legislación agraria argentina.” Report to Minister of Agriculture Victoriano de la Plaza, n.d.,, Archivo Victorino de la Plaza, bk. 1 p.5 AGN VIII 4 6 1; Slatta, 101

La aspiracion, Aug. 12, 13, 1876; Slatta, 100

Miller, General William, 1818; Slatta 168

Revista del Plata, 1854; Slatta 97

Revista del Plata 2, (1854): 313; Slatta 97