La reindianización de América is a collection of 17 articles that focus on the processes of Indian social and cultural survival in Latin America during the nineteenth century. The regions studied include parts of Mexico, Guatemala, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Chile, and Brazil. The articles clearly show that “reindianization” was the result of communal resistance to liberal programs that promoted individual land ownership and hacienda expansion. Indians countered these efforts not only through violent rebellion, but also via alliances with various elite groups that, enervated by intraelite struggles, sought support from Indian groups. Not all resistance was successful. Guillermo Palacio’s article on Brazil, entitled “Indios, cultividores pobres y frontera agrícola en Pernambuco,” demonstrates that the expansion of sugar plantations overwhelmed the small Indian groups living on the frontier. Once their resistance collapsed, they fled and eventually merged with the non-Indian poor of Pernambuco. Certainly, one of the basic factors that explains the survival of Indian social organizations in Mexico, Guatemala, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, and Chile, in contrast to Brazil, is demographic: the peasants of the traditional (preconquest), densely inhabited, Indian core areas were much more likely to develop strategies of resistance and preserve their social organization than peasants elsewhere. In these core areas, the settlement of outsiders during the colonial period and the nineteenth century was minimal.

Reviewing each article is obviously impossible. But several stand out because of their “unexpected” perspective. Rather than focus on Indians living in their own communities, Mario Humberto Ruz’s article on “Etnicidad, territorio y trabajo en las fincas decimonónicas de Comitán, Chiapas,” reveals that on the coffee fincas workers created an Indian communal lifestyle through daily adaptation to the demands of their bosses. These acts of adaptation contributed to their solidarity and group identification as Indian, rather than their incorporation into the ladino world. Moreover, learning about and adopting practices of the non-Indian world did not mean that Indians automatically abandoned their Indian identity. The same theme of “dynamic adaptability” appears in the articles (all relating to Mexico) by Leticia Reina on the Zapotecs of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, Cynthia Radding on the “campesinos indigenas” of Sonora, and Antonio Escobar on the Indian communites of the Huasteca.

Several articles show that the elite contributed to the continuance of Indian social organization, the passage of a liberal program to the contrary. In her study of Ayacucho, Peru, Cecilia Méndez notes that many liberal laws that sought to change Indian communities were never implemented. For immediate practical reasons, local elites saw greater advantages in preserving these communities. During economic downturns, hacendados depended on communities for labor and as outlets for their goods. Also, as a result of incessant intraelite conflict, Indians received arms from various governments.

Guy Thomson’s review of the career of Juan Francisco Lucas, the caudillo of Puebla, Mexico during the 1850s and 1870s, illustrates how a local political boss could serve as a mediator between Indians and the liberal movement. By taking advantage of local Indian customs, Lucas not only supported liberal politicians with food and recruits, but also preserved a local Indian lifestyle. John Tutino’s study of popular Christianity in the Valley of Mexico during the early nineteenth century reveals that veneration of the Virgin of Guadalupe served as another form of mediation between the creole elite and campesinos.

This collection reminds readers of the complex forms of interaction among national elites, local elites, and local peasants who were aware of their ethnic identity and political interests. Maps accompany each regional study, adding to the collection’s usefulness.