The title of this rather long book is only partly accurate. Instead of an “Indian history of Bolivia,” it is largely an intellectual history of how various (mainly non-Indian) intellectuals have considered the “Indian problem.” Only the last third of the book takes into account indigenous thinkers of the second half of the twentieth century. Even in the later chapters, other than a brief summary of social conditions in the 1940s, there is virtually nothing on the social or economic conditions of indigenous peoples in Bolivia.
The author takes the reader back to the late colonial period, although his focus is primarily on the postindependence period. Manuel Sarkisyanz’s method is to summarize the thoughts on Indians of the most important (and some more obscure) thinkers of the period and to delineate changing government policies toward Indians. The nineteenth century warrants one chapter of 90 pages, whereas the first half of the twentieth century receives two chapters (200 pages). The “Indianist” and Katarista parties of the post-1952 period get two chapters (150 pages). It is difficult to summarize the main argument of the book, for that argument is difficult to discern. The author provides coherent but conventional analyses of most thinkers who expressed themselves on the matter of the indigenous population; for example, he discusses the policies of Manuel Isidro Belzu as highly favorable toward the Indians, as well as the racist ideology of Alcides Arguedas, best exemplified by his Pueblo enfermo (1910). Virtually all of Sarkisyanz’s work is based on secondary sources and other printed materials (including some newspapers).
Only in the last section does the author add personal interviews of some of the principal protagonists of the Indian rights movement in Bolivia of the 1970s and 1980s. It is difficult for the non-Bolivianist, however, to perceive, through the welter of names and places, what the main tendencies and the national significance of these movements were. It is interesting that Sarkisyanz includes chapters on some of the most important social scientists of the Indian movements, such as Silvia Rivera, Roberto Choque, and Xavier Albó; yet the only impression the reader gets from these summaries for the more recent period is that of the longstanding conflict between leftists who prefer a class-based analysis of Bolivia’s countryside and those who champion the ethnic dimension above all else. Unfortunately, the author completely ignores the relatively new but highly significant movements of lowland Indians in Bolivia; his only treatment of the lowlands examines the racist views of some of the individuals and parties emerging from Santa Cruz.
The production values of this tome are not high. The book consists of double-spaced, typewritten pages. The footnotes sometimes are mixed up, and some of the authors’ names are misspelled. Few books and scholarly articles published since 1986 are cited, during which time scholarly production on Indian movements in Bolivia has exploded. I recommend this book for its encyclopedic qualities, but it does not constitute a significant new contribution to the field.