antonio espinoza-education and the state inmodern peru (1821-1921).pdf

Copyrighted material – 9781137338402

Contents

List of Figures and Tables vii

Series Editors’ Preface ix

Acknowledgments xi

Introduction 1

1 Schooling Patterns 21

2 From Republicanism to Popular Instruction to Nationalism: Official Educational Ideas and Goals in Peru, 1821–1905 45

3 Teachers, Local Communities, and National Government 79

4 Inside Primary Schools: Curricula and Methods in the Lima Region, 1821–1905 119

5 The Realities of the Estado Docente: Educational Centralization from 1905 to c. 1921 159

Conclusions 197

Notes 203

Bibliography 253

Index 277



EDUCATION AND THE STATE IN MODERN PERU

Copyright © G. Antonio Espinoza, 2013.

All rights reserved.

Parts of chapter 2 were published in Spanish in Histórica (Department of Humanities—Pontifical Catholic University of Peru), 31: 1 (2007). They appear here, revised and translated, by permission of the editor of the aforementioned journal.

An earlier version of chapter 3 was published in Spanish in Cuadernos de Historia (Department of Historical Sciences—School of Philosophy and Humanities—University of Chile), 34 (June 2011). The revised, extended, and translated version appears here by permission from the editor of the aforementioned journal.

First published in 2013 byPALGRAVE MACMILLAN®in the United States— a division of St. Martin’s Press LLC,175 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10010.

Where this book is distributed in the UK, Europe and the rest of the world,this is by Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited, registered in England, company number 785998, of Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 6XS.

Palgrave Macmillan is the global academic imprint of the above companiesand has companies and representatives throughout the world.

Palgrave® and Macmillan® are registered trademarks in the United States, the United Kingdom, Europe and other countries.

ISBN: 978–1–137–33840–2

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication DataEspinoza, G. Antonio, 1970– Education and the state in modern Peru : primary schooling in Lima, 1821–c. 1921 / G. Antonio Espinoza. pages cm.—(Historical studies in education) Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 978–1–137–33840–2 (alk. paper) 1. Education, Primary—Peru—Lima—History. 2. Education and state—Peru. I. Title. LA597.E87 2013372.982—dc23 2013024518

A catalogue record of the book is available from the British Library.

Design by Newgen Knowledge Works (P) Ltd., Chennai, India.

First edition: December 2013

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1



Introduction

The existence of a centralized system of public education in Peru is a reality that was not questioned, either officially or unofficially, until recently. Although several other Latin American countries have moved toward the decentralization and privatization of schools since the 1980s, Peruvian public opinion assumed that national govern-ment control over primary and secondary schools was a given. It took until 2006 for President Alan García, leader of populist party Acción Popular Revolucionaria Americana (APRA), to implement a small-scale program of educational decentralization. National authorities handed the administration and funding of public schools to a lim-ited number of municipal governments. The program faced strong opposition from politicians and educators who feared a lack of human and financial resources and declining working conditions for teach-ers. By the time García’s administration ended in 2011, the program was largely stalled and new President Ollanta Humala cancelled it. Reference to the history of public schooling in Peru has been mostly absent from these recent events.

During the nineteenth century, most public schools were admin-istered and funded by city and town councils. Municipal authorities opened schools, appointed and dismissed teachers, and had a major say regarding curricula, textbooks, and methods. This decentralized system of public education faced various institutional, pedagogical, and financial problems. Nevertheless, it provided an indispensable foundation for the establishment of an Estado Docente (Teaching State) or centralized educational system at the beginning of the twen-tieth century.1

In this book I examine primary schooling as a component of the process of state formation in Peru since independence from Spain in 1821 up to the first two decades of the twentieth century. During this decisive historical period national and local elites, in interaction with the middle sectors and the lower classes, established the bases of the modern Peruvian state. My approach combines two recent trends in the scholarship on Modern Latin America that have generally

9781137338402_02_int.indd 1 11/6/2013 6:00:34 PM



2 EDUCATION AND THE STATE IN MODERN PERU

remained separate in studies on the Peruvian case: the understanding of state building as a cultural process and the study of the interac-tion between state and civil society in the educational realm. Most of the recent historiography on Peru has devoted little attention to primary schooling despite its formative influence on children and the institutional and economic problems it faces in the country. By focusing on the primary schools of the departamento or region of Lima—which include the capital city, and the surrounding, mostly

Lima LIMAPacific Ocean

Figure I.1 Lima region (Departamento) nowadays. Source: Map by Emily Anne Hall.

9781137338402_02_int.indd 2 11/6/2013 6:00:34 PM



INTRODUCTION 3

rural provinces—my study overcomes the tendency of similar works on other Latin American countries that have focused either on the urban or the countryside areas. My book brings together the effects of ideology and politics on education at the macro- and microlevels, by analyzing the relationship between state and local communities not only around but also within schools.

The book demonstrates three main theses. First, during most of the studied period, political and intellectual elites conceived of school-ing as a means to reproduce social hierarchies, encouraging authori-tarianism and intolerance, rather than promoting egalitarianism and democratic republican values. Second, despite schooling’s conserva-tive nature, its gradual expansion was driven by the combined effect of governmental intervention and social demand for education. Finally, those families that had access to formal education sought to acquire both practical skills and cultural capital. There was no explicit collec-tive criticism of traditional hierarchies within the schooling realm. The preference that families had for certain subjects, methods, and disciplinary practices was, however, an implicit critique of official standards.

The period under study was crucial in the construction of the Peruvian state as the country faced numerous challenges. These included postindependence instability (1821–1845) and catastrophic defeat in the War with Chile (1879–1883), as well as economic bonan-zas during the guano-export boom (1845–1870) and the Aristocratic Republic (1895–1919). Transitioning from a Spanish colony into an independent republic, a privileged criollo minority (white individu-als of mostly European descent and outlook) rhetorically declared the importance of forming virtuous and useful citizens. The emerg-ing state—weak, ineffective, and dependent on local interests—had a limited educational role, relying instead on the Catholic Church, private entrepreneurs, and municipal authorities. Economic growth in the late 1840s allowed the national government to begin expand-ing and strengthening the state apparatus. In the early 1860s, Lima authorities started the construction of a public educational system entrusting the management of public schools to municipal authori-ties, providing them with regular subsidies, while looking for greater supervision over teaching practices and content.2 The decline of the guano-export economy in the early 1870s and the War with Chile forced the state to reduce subsidies for public schooling. As the econ-omy recovered after the war, regional authorities and local parents increased their investment in public and private schools respectively. In a parallel manner, some criollo and mestizo (mixed-race) intellectuals

9781137338402_02_int.indd 3 11/6/2013 6:00:34 PM




developed Indigenismo, an ideology that sought to improve the moral and material situation of Indians. By 1905, the combined effect of favorable material conditions, nationalism and Positivism, and wide-spread teacher support encouraged the national government to centralize the administration, funding, and supervision of primary schools, while increasing state investment in education significantly. Regional and local power-holders resented the confiscation of their educational resources and were able to wrestle some oversight from national authorities in the short term. Nevertheless, in 1921, the national government was able to fully reaffirm the measures first introduced in 1905.

The geographical focus of my study is the departamento of Lima. “Departamentos” or regions have traditionally been the largest units of political and fiscal administration in Modern Peru. They include a number of provincias or provinces, which are in turn divided into distritos or districts. The authorities in charge of regions are the pre-fectos, aided by subprefectos at the provincial level and gobernadores at the district one. The region of Lima was created right after the declaration of independence from Spain in 1821, and since then it had an exceptional territorial continuity. In addition, this region included both urban and rural areas and experienced intense edu-cational activity during the period of study. For most of this period, the region was divided into five provinces: Lima, Chancay, Cañete, Canta, Huarochirí, and Yauyos. The province of Lima included the capital city and adjacent districts or suburbs.

State, Nation, and the History of Education in Peru

The scholarship on state and nation in Peru and the literature on the history of education in this country often lack explicit reference to each other. Nevertheless, a careful revision of both branches of scholarship reveals a number of shared assumptions. Intellectuals such as Víctor Andrés Belaunde, José de la Riva-Agüero, and José Carlos Mariátegui established some of these assumptions in the early twentieth century. Beginning in the 1970s, a revisionist generation of scholars criticized the theses of Belaunde, Riva-Agüero, and their followers, while reiterating and refining some of Mariátegui’s points of view. A more recent generation of historians, influenced by the theoretical contributions of Antonio Gramsci, Benedict Anderson, and Philip Corrigan and Derek Sawyer, have renewed the discus-sion on state and nation in Peru. With a few exceptions, this recent

9781137338402_02_int.indd 4 11/6/2013 6:00:35 PM



INTRODUCTION 5

historical scholarship has recognized the importance of education as an integral part of state and nation building while paying only sec-ondary attention to it.

In the early twentieth century, elite intellectuals such as Belaunde and Riva-Agüero sought to write a Historia Patria or history or the Peruvian fatherland. Both writers defined the nation as a spiri-tual community united by a common past and the collective will to preserve its historical legacy in the future.3 For Historia Patria, the Peruvian nation was formed during the colonial period, as a result of the miscegenation of the Spanish, Indian, and African races, each with their respective cultural contributions. Once the nation achieved its independence from Spain, it became a free, legally organized, and sovereign “state.” Later contributors to Historia Patria considered the existence of the nation since the colonial period indisputable, although they recognized a degree of variation in “national consciousness,” or individual awareness of being Peruvian.4

While Belaunde and Riva-Agüero laid the basis of Historia Patria, their teacher and friend Manuel Vicente Villarán set up some of the tropes of the history of education in Peru. Villarán was a law pro-fessor who belonged to Segundo Civilismo or Second Civilismo, the re-emergent Partido Civil or Civilista Party originally established in the early 1870s. He served as Minister of Education between 1908 and 1909. In 1913, while the parliament discussed reversing some aspects of the educational centralization initiated by Second Civilismo eight years earlier, Villarán published a series of articles on the history of education in Peru.5 In line with Positivist thought, Villarán made an institutional analysis of education, focusing on official regulations, the authorities who introduced them, and specific schools. Condemning the failure of past governments to centralize the educational system, the Civilista professor argued for state control over public schooling.6 Villarán blamed the shortcomings of public schools before 1905 on lack of local support, incompetence of municipal authorities and local political officers, and congressional interference in educational affairs. For Villarán, the decentralized organization of public schools was unable to provide adequate management and funding, while the cen-tralized system had the potential to succeed.7 Years later, Víctor Andrés Belaunde repeated Villáran’s arguments to defend centralization.8

In the late 1920s, political philosopher José Carlos Mariátegui questioned the assumptions made by Historia Patria by introduc-ing a Marxist-inspired interpretation of the state and the nation. Mariátegui argued that the Peruvian state that emerged after indepen-dence was democratic and bourgeois only in appearance. In actuality,

9781137338402_02_int.indd 5 11/6/2013 6:00:35 PM




the traditional feudal class kept control over the state apparatus. It expanded agricultural estates and maintained a colonial heritage of political bosses and indigenous servitude.9 For Mariátegui, the Peruvian “nationality” was still in formation because the racial and spiritual “duality,” or divide between the Spanish and Indian legacies, survived. Feudal economic and social conditions nullified the positive qualities of different racial groups, and thus cultural and racial mix-ing could not solve the duality. In any case, Mariátegui believed that Indians were the cement of nationality.10

Unlike other nineteenth- and early-twentieth-century Peruvian intellectuals, Mariátegui believed that public education could only be effective and fair under broad and truly democratic conditions. He considered that Indians and workers indeed needed to be edu-cated, but the first priority was to solve their economic and social problems.11 Mariátegui argued that education in Modern Peru had been imitative, “aristocratic,” and impractical. The elite copied for-eign educational models, trying to implement them without taking into account the national reality. The scholastic and literary character of Spanish education had survived the colonial period. The feudal ruling class, disguised as bourgeois, had promised an expansion of education after independence. Although criollos gained greater access to schooling, Indians remained excluded. In the early twentieth cen-tury, Second Civilismo made a real attempt to improve literacy among Indians, in order to enhance the capitalistic, export-oriented devel-opment of the country. However, opposition from feudal highland landowners had hindered this effort.12

Historia Patria had a long influence on Peruvian historiography in general and the scholarship on the history of education in particular. Reifying the concept of nation, it posited it as an immaterial entity of unquestionable existence that predated independence. The nega-tive events in the historical development of the nation and the state were due to regrettable occurrences, the defects of individual his-torical characters, and the insufficient “national consciousness” of an indeterminate part of the population. Historia Patria made no effort to analyze either broader economic and social structures, or their influence over the development of the national community or the apparatus of government. In the specific case of the history of educa-tion, Historia Patria emphasized institutional aspects. It was able to describe some of the problems that hampered the scope and effective-ness of public education in Modern Peru, but its explanatory capacity was limited. Villarán and Belaunde failed to notice that the decen-tralized network of municipal schools provided a framework for the

9781137338402_02_int.indd 6 11/6/2013 6:00:35 PM



INTRODUCTION 7

centralized system. Judging educational decentralization anachronis-tically, they missed the fact that the concept of “educational system” itself was gradually implemented elsewhere during the first half of the nineteenth century. Many studies on educational history continue to focus on specific institutions, official regulations, and the politicians and intellectuals responsible for them.13

In contrast to Historia Patria, Mariátegui related the analysis of state, nation, and education to broader economic and social issues. He pointed out the fragmented character of Peruvian society and the existence of different elite factions. Nevertheless, Mariátegui also had an idealized image of what a consolidated nation was and believed that Peru deviated from such an abstraction. He was the first national intellectual to note that elites could potentially use the state and education as instruments to further their class interests. At the same time, his perspective was flawed, viewing the exercise of state power as a unidirectional process. He ignored the responses of the middle and lower sectors to state initiatives and their participation in the construction of the school system. Mariátegui acknowledged the Civilista effort to expand public schooling, but he examined neither the specific steps toward centralization nor the political and cultural implications they had.

In the early 1970s, partly motivated by the commemoration of the centennial of independence, a group of scholars reiterated and expanded some of Mariátegui’s arguments regarding the state and the nation. Inspired by Marxism and Dependency Theory, these revi-sionist scholars stressed the colonial legacy that survived formal inde-pendence from Spain. They denied the existence of a nation in Peru, due to class antagonism, rigid racial divisions, and lack of uniformity and equality.14 Revisionism pointed out that the postindependence elite was divided into factions, none of which became a hegemonic “ruling class” able to prevail upon other elite factions and respond to lower-class demands.15 The Peruvian state was weak due to its perma-nent dependence on foreign economic interests, a deficient internal market, and the patrimonial administration of government. The state apparatus had to support itself on the various “oligarchic factions” and their clientelistic relationship with both foreign interests and the subaltern population. As a result, “public” office ended up having a private nature.16 Although Historia Patria and revisionism disagreed on several issues, both presumed that modern Peru deviated from an ideal model of nation building.17 Revisionism paid insufficient atten-tion to the cultural aspects of state and nation formation, while sub-ordinating the political realm to economic actors and their interests.18

9781137338402_02_int.indd 7 11/6/2013 6:00:35 PM




It also defined the relationship between the elite and the subordinate groups in antagonistic terms.

Even though revisionist social scientists did not devote themselves to the study of education development, other scholars have applied their ideas—or those of Mariátegui—to the history of education. They have made a valuable effort to contextualize educational his-tory within broader economic and social trends. These scholars have also alluded to the neocolonial and fragmented character of Peruvian society after independence.19 They have noted that nineteenth- century elites followed foreign educational doctrines and that they used education as an instrument for their own agendas. Nevertheless, this scholarship has not examined the foreign educational paradigms adopted by Peruvian politicians and intellectuals or why certain ideas were more successful than others. These scholars have not established which minorities had access to formal education during the nineteenth century and whether social groups other than the elites participated in educational processes. Finally, both the studies on the history of education influenced by Historia Patria as well as those that follow revisionism keep on interpreting the development of public education in Modern Peru as a linear, progressive process from decentralized chaos to centralized order.

Contemporary historical approaches to the state and the nation in Latin America have benefited from the contributions of Italian writer Antonio Gramsci, French sociologist Pierre Bordieu, and his British colleagues Philip Corrigan and Derek Sayer. In institutional terms, the modern state is generally understood as a bureaucratic apparatus with coercive prerogatives and administrative capacities. Elite or “bourgeois” factions lead the process of state-construction but they require degrees of participation of other social groups. In order to achieve this participation, ruling classes resort to coercion and negotiation, imposition, and consent.20 The state is also defined by different social groups’ perception of the legitimacy to rule that the bureaucratic apparatus gains and maintains.21 Gramsci spoke of the cultural role of the bourgeois state, creating new types of “civili-zation” through the exertion of “educative pressure” over society and individuals to promote certain values, ideas, habits, and behaviors, while eliminating others.22 Corrigan and Sayer further developed the concept of state formation as an incremental process of bourgeois moral regulation and social rule.23

Since the early 1990s, a number of historical studies on Latin America have shown that elites in search of national hegemony advanced projects of a varied nature (economic, ideological, institutional, and

9781137338402_02_int.indd 8 11/6/2013 6:00:35 PM



INTRODUCTION 9

otherwise), which were contested, selectively embraced, negotiated, and/or modified by different social groups according to their own agendas.24 In the case of Peru, the historiography has focused on the republican project of representative democracy, individual rights, patriotism, and meritocratic advancement, which a criollo faction promoted after independence with uneven success. Elite politician Manuel Pardo and his original Partido Civil revamped this tradition of political culture in the 1870s.25 Some works have analyzed the appro-priation of republican rhetoric by elite members, urban artisans, and highland peasants to further their political interests, social standing, and material conditions.26 Other works have paid greater attention to the peasant appropriation and recreation of nationalism during and after the War with Chile.27 These studies have discarded the reified concept of “nation” as understood by Historia Patria and revisionism, adopting instead the more dynamic definition of the nation as an “imagined community.”28 Fostering identification with the imagined political community and encouraging allegiance to it were power-ful means to create consent. Scholars like Mallon and Mc Evoy have studied the “hegemonic processes,” or interactions between elites and subordinate groups, around common discursive frameworks such as republicanism and nationalism. By focusing on these processes, they have presented a less oppositional view of the relationships among different social groups.29

My book is also in dialogue with the recent scholarship on educa-tion and state and nation formation in Latin America. Studies on Peru have provided valuable insights into official educational policies and their motivations, but they have paid minimal attention to broader social processes.30 The literature on other Latin American countries has delved much more into the relationship between schooling and hegemony, local responses to formal education, and education as a means of social reproduction and social control. The scholarship on revolutionary Mexico, in particular, shows that elites who carried on projects of state and nation building negotiated to varying degrees with local communities regarding educational matters. Between the 1920s and 1930s, Mexican schools were social and cultural arenas for the interaction among federal government, local officers, pro-vincial teachers, and rural inhabitants. The revolutionary state and rural society elaborated a common language of consent and dissent through educational institutions, infrastructure, content, and activi-ties. This common language was organized around ideas of collective right to social justice, inclusion in modernity, membership in a bicul-tural society, and shared concepts of the constitution. Elsie Rockwell

9781137338402_02_int.indd 9 11/6/2013 6:00:36 PM




understands “civil society” as the historically constituted relation-ships that make collective action viable. She argues that revolutionary education strengthened these relationships by providing new public spaces, novel forms of association and decision, and renovated rituals. Mary Kay Vaughan contends that the Mexican revolutionary state achieved a certain degree of negotiated hegemony, not free of coer-cion and resistance, by tutoring an incipient civil society through a mutually elaborated collective language.31

In explaining local attitudes toward formal education, the recent scholarship has gone beyond the conventional dichotomy between “tradition” and “modernity.” Local responses to school-ing, whether positive or negative, depended on a plurality of factors. Communities—or groups within communities—embraced school-ing because they considered education and literacy desirable assets in themselves, but they also did so due to political affiliations and expectation of increased access to land and employment, among other motivations. Local indifference or opposition toward school-ing also had various sources, such as economic difficulties, specific family goals, and partisan conflicts.32 When approaching local reac-tions toward formal education, demand is a variable that deserves greater attention.33 Educational demand is closely related to the economic capacity and preferences of families. By assessing social demand it is possible to explain why parents sent their children to school and why they chose certain schools over others. The evolving number of schools and their enrollments can be taken as indicators of educational demand; data on schools that required the payment of fees can be taken as a closer guide. Parents who enrolled their chil-dren in free schools were giving up on all or part of the income their offspring could otherwise make by working; they were also assuming the varying costs of supplies and books. Families that enrolled their children in paid schools were, in addition, taking on the responsibil-ity of disbursing fees.

The recent scholarship on educational history in Latin America has also discussed the scope and limits of conceiving of schooling as a means for social reproduction and social control.34 Since the colonial period, elites in the region used formal education to repro-duce existing ideas, values, and hierarchies. As the scholarship on the late colonial era shows, education did not explicitly encourage social mobility, even though some individuals were able to improve their status through it.35 Postindependence republicanism included the promise of legal equality and social advancement according to indi-vidual merit. Yet the new governments did not grant full citizenship

9781137338402_02_int.indd 10 11/6/2013 6:00:36 PM



INTRODUCTION 11

to everyone, and schooling—and the lack of it—continued being a means to replicate social, racial, and gender hierarchies. Only a minor-ity of the school-age population was enrolled in primary schools in practically every country in the region until the first decade of the twentieth century.36 At the same time, it is important to distinguish among the purposes that elites assigned to schooling, the responses of the middle- and lower-class families who were able and willing to send their children to school, and the actual outcome in terms of social and economic mobility. We can safely assume that one of the motivations that parents had to send their children to school was the expectation that their offspring would have a better future status. This does not necessarily mean that these parents accepted or questioned the exist-ing social order as a whole. It seems likely that their first priority was the advancement of their own children and that they considered the future of their classmates secondary or inconsequential. Assessing the extent to which schooling facilitated mobility is a much harder task, and so far, no scholarly historical study on Latin America has attempted to do so comprehensively.

The concept of education as a means of social control is useful but also has its limits. Latin American elites established institutions such as orphanages, poorhouses, and asylums, arguably aimed toward providing care to the destitute and the ill. The parallel, implicit logic of these institutions was disciplining the behavior of those classified as unfit or deviant, while regulating the conduct of those considered able and normal. To be effective, all of these institutions had to offer some sort of actual or perceived benefit to their “subjects” and society at large. In the specific case of schools, it is clear that enrollment and attendance depended on a certain degree of acquiescence from both parents and students. Additionally, parents and children could pas-sively or actively resist specific aspects of school curricula and meth-ods while still remaining engaged with schooling. Elites conceived of schools as disciplining institutions and organized them accordingly, but on a day-to-day basis they were contested spaces. Rockwell has noted that schooling in revolutionary Mexico sought to “discipline” children’s bodies but these exercised a measure of collective power within the classroom that became apparent when they negotiated conditions of teaching, or when they chose to speak in their native language rather than Spanish.37

My book views state and nation building as parallel, multifaceted processes that encompassed the economic, social, political, and cul-tural realms. Elite factions alternated in leading these processes accord-ing to their agendas, constantly interacting with other social groups

9781137338402_02_int.indd 11 11/6/2013 6:00:36 PM




that had their own priorities and needs. Similar to what happened in other Latin American countries, Peruvian elites had to engage with subaltern groups in order to achieve periods of hegemony of varying stability and endurance. The formation of the nation in Peru required a certain development of the state framework, insofar as the elites were seeking to homogenize the population. The construction of the state and the nation were not linear or teleological processes; there were setbacks, and outcomes were not predetermined. Each social group pursued its own ideas, values, and expectations while interact-ing with other social groups.

From the perspective of the history of education, there were two moments in which national authorities achieved greater financial, administrative, and pedagogical intervention in primary schooling, as part of broader processes of building hegemony. The first of these moments was between the 1850s and early 1870s, and the second one was in the first two decades of the twentieth century. During both periods, growing fiscal revenues and increasing demand for educa-tion encouraged and allowed national governments to expand public schooling. In the mid-nineteenth century, President Ramón Castilla (1845–1851, 1854–1862) sought to gain stability, assert the author-ity of his regimes, and create alliances with local powers by augment-ing public expenditure and enlarging the bureaucracy. Castilla issued the first national educational code in 1850 and began establishing municipal schools subsidized by the treasury in the early 1860s. The second period of strengthened state hegemony in Lima came after President José Pardo (1904–1908), leading Second Civilismo, issued Law 162 in 1905. This law fully centralized the administration, fund-ing, and supervision of public primary education. This move was aimed toward expanding the support base of Second Civilismo, affirming the authority of the government over local powers, improving public primary education, and enhancing nationalism through schooling. It was a measure facilitated by a recovering export economy, relative stability, the preexistence of a network of public schools, and teach-ers’ and parents’ support. These were regimes that were quantitatively inclusive in educational terms. They expanded a public service and met the demand of a larger part of the population, albeit not the majority. Under Castilla, public schooling grew in the capital city and reached the main provincial towns, while the rural areas and the indigenous population in particular remained largely marginalized. Second Civilismo consolidated urban public schooling and reached the rural areas of Lima, but results in the highlands were partial at best.

9781137338402_02_int.indd 12 11/6/2013 6:00:36 PM



INTRODUCTION 13

My book demonstrates that patrimonialism and, later in the period, official nationalism were the predominant political traditions in primary education in Lima. Authoritarianism was a constant politi-cal tradition along the whole period of study.38 The recent histori-ography on Peru has stressed how both elites and subaltern groups sometimes embraced a republican discourse to advance their own agendas. This historiography has assessed the role of republicanism in the educational realm to a limited extent. Although some of these studies have recognized the existence of parallel traditions of political culture, they have not analyzed their impact on schooling.39 Schools were established, organized, and managed along patronage practices, rather than meritocratic ones, especially until the early twentieth century.40 Educational content and methods were generally infused with authoritarianism, respect toward traditional hierarchies, and Catholicism, rather than democratic values, egalitarianism, or secu-larism. After the War with Chile, governments promoted a revanchist and inclusive form of nationalism that viewed Indians as potential soldiers and peasants rather than fully enfranchised citizens.

My study views patronage or clientelism, one of the elements of patrimonialism, as a political practice that was compatible with state building and the construction of a system of public school-ing in Peru. Lima’s educational officers and public school teachers were not a “modern bureaucracy” in the sense used by Max Weber.41 Nevertheless, they managed and distributed educational resources and provided schooling to a growing number of students.42 Patronage was as much part of the common discursive framework shared by elites and subordinate classes as was republicanism; one political tra-dition was not exclusive of the other. Elites benefited the most out of clientelism but, for this practice to work, they had to provide benefits to the subaltern.43 The elite faction that was in power could hold a republican discourse in public, while resorting to patronage in the conduct of official affairs. The existence of various political discourses was generally accepted, except in those conjunctures when an emerg-ing group questioned the faction in power. Then the emerging group could resort to a republican discourse to attract broader social sup-port, without giving up on the practical use of clientelism.

The educational priorities of the Peruvian elites and the middle sectors and lower classes were sometimes convergent and at other times divergent.44 When there was more convergence, both private and public schooling had better chances of expanding. Divergence led to deficient enrollment and declining attendance, as well as ten-sions and conflicts. Primary sources frequently mention that parents

9781137338402_02_int.indd 13 11/6/2013 6:00:37 PM




failed to enroll their children in schools or neglected to enforce their attendance, due to poverty or economic need. This was more frequent in rural areas rather than urban ones, as parents dedicated to agricul-ture relied more heavily on child labor. At the same time, since the postindependence years, Peruvian elites saw education as a means for social reproduction and social control. Sometimes they contradicted middle- and lower-class family expectations of social mobility and empowerment, causing verbal and written complaints and sometimes even physical confrontations. These conflicts were frequently inter-twined with clientelistic and partisan politics.

Periodization and Chapters

The organization of this book is both chronological and thematic. The first chapter establishes and examines schooling patterns in the Lima region from 1821 to 1920. The evidence shows that expansion of schooling was driven by both social demand for education and state intervention. The variables that I assess are numbers of public and private schools, enrollment according to type of school, and registra-tion in relationship to school-age population. During the first three decades after independence, state investment in primary education was minimal. Nevertheless, stable enrollment in private schools in the city of Lima indicates the existence of educational demand, albeit a stunted one. In the provinces, communities paid for a limited number of intermittent schools with local revenues and user fees. In those periods in which state investment in public education increased— notably, in the early 1860s and the early 1900s—enrollment in public schools grew too. Information on registration as a proportion of the population of school age for all of Lima’s provinces is available for the last quarter of the nineteenth century. In this period, commercial-ization of local economies and urbanization encouraged educational demand in the region. However, land concentration in private hands forced poor parents to rely on their children’s labor to sustain their families, thus setting limits to school enrollment.

The second chapter of the book examines the goals that mem-bers of the political and intellectual elite assigned to primary school-ing, and establishes the pedagogical doctrines these elite members embraced to accomplish their objectives. My analysis is based on offi-cial regulations, contemporary opinions, and school texts. I reserve the discussion on the educational ideas and practices of parents and students for chapter 4. During the whole period under study, politi-cians, educational officers, and Catholic priests conceived of primary

9781137338402_02_int.indd 14 11/6/2013 6:00:37 PM



INTRODUCTION 15

schooling as utilitarian, morally and intellectually corrective, socially and racially ascriptive, and partly gender specific. Postindependence elites displayed an ambivalent republicanism and their pedagogical ideas were inspired by empiricist and Enlightened late-colonial tradi-tions. They proclaimed their interest in molding all Peruvians into patriotic citizens, but educational opinions and school texts displayed racial prejudices against Indians and blacks, and encouraged defer-ence toward social hierarchies. Since the mid-1840s, within a climate of heightened ideological debate between Liberals and Conservatives, there was some criticism upon the arrival of new Catholic teaching orders, though no questioning of the role of Catholicism in moral education as a whole. Overall, during the first half of the nineteenth century, there was a great degree of continuity of late-colonial edu-cational ideas.

From the mid-nineteenth century to the War with Chile, elites adopted the idea of “popular instruction” as a basic elementary edu-cation that all citizens should receive. Popular instruction was meant to foster patriotism, more secularized moral values, law abidance, and racial harmony. Political and intellectual elites thought that slav-ery and servitude had degraded blacks and Indians respectively, and believed that education could regenerate both groups. Due in part to racial prejudices, history, geography, and civics school texts failed to present an inclusive view of the Peruvian past, territory, and politi-cal organization that could further an emotional allegiance to the nation. Indigenous unrest in the late 1860s fostered concern among some politicians and intellectuals about effectively providing instruc-tion to rural areas and the Indian population. The desirable degree of influence of the Catholic Church in education and the appropriate extension of schooling for girls became controversial subjects. These were debates that continued into the late nineteenth century.

After the defeat in the War with Chile, most of the upper class blamed the loss on the lower classes and Indians because of their sup-posed lack of national allegiance. The export-oriented oligarchy that took power in the early 1890s advanced an anti-Chilean, revanchist, and relatively inclusive form of nationalism that became the preva-lent political ideology in primary education in the late-nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Nationalism was accompanied by interest in military training and physical education for students. One elite faction influenced by Positivism criticized the Catholic Church’s involvement in education. Effects in policy, however, were limited. Conservative and progressive intellectuals embraced Indigenismo and thus encour-aged the national government to educate Indians so as to incorporate

9781137338402_02_int.indd 15 11/6/2013 6:00:37 PM




them effectively into the national community. Most agreed on the need to spread Spanish and eradicate indigenous languages. The idea was to integrate Indians into the nation as future peasants and sol-diers rather than citizens with equal rights to whites and mestizos.

Chapter 3 examines the performance of local authorities, teachers, and parents in relationship to schools from 1821 to 1905. As men-tioned earlier, previous scholars have argued that political officers, teachers, and parents neglected educational regulations due to cor-ruption, carelessness, and ignorance. It is necessary to look beyond negligence and insufficient preparation, and to carefully examine local agendas, to better understand educational performances. We can identify at least two axes of conflict around schools: the sources and allocation of funds and the appointment and dismissal of teach-ers. From independence up to the 1860s the national government funded just a handful of public schools in the capital city while other schools charged fees to parents. Outside the city of Lima, public schools were generally located in provincial and district capitals, and they were paid for with local funds. These funds came from tradi-tional cargo systems, communal lands, or local taxes. Those parents who had the capacity to do so paid for private schools, which gener-ally had an intermittent existence. Teachers tended to be much more responsive to local demands rather than national ones, because com-munity authorities or parents paid teachers’ wages.

The national government reestablished municipalidades or munic-ipal councils between the 1850s and early 1870s. The government ordered city and town councils to open public schools. At the same time, national authorities assumed the commitment of providing subsidies to these new public schools using treasury funds. Although national authorities kept the right to exercise some supervision over municipal schools, their direct management was left to municipali-dades. This was a concession to local power-holders, who continued mediating the fulfillment of educational regulations, the application of official curricula, and the appointment and supervision of teach-ers. In 1873, fiscal deficit forced President Manuel Pardo to cancel national subsidies to municipal schools. The national government ordered municipalidades to collect a new head tax to fund public schools—all the while trying to increase national supervision over school administration and teaching. A number of municipal coun-cils closed their schools, and many of those that kept them open resisted state intervention.45 Irregular school attendance was com-mon, which led to occasional complaints of national and regional authorities, though local officers seldom took measures. Public

9781137338402_02_int.indd 16 11/6/2013 6:00:37 PM



INTRODUCTION 17

schooling remained administratively and financially “decentralized” until 1905. As the economy recovered in the 1880s, private school-ing expanded.

Chapter 4 analyzes the “school culture,” or everyday subjects, instructional methods, disciplinary practices, and public ceremonies, in the schools of Lima from independence up to the early twentieth century.46 Examining the development of school culture provides a sharper view of the educational ideas, values, and priorities of local teachers and families. Along the period of study, parents expected pri-mary education to provide a minimum of practical skills, moral prepa-ration, and religious indoctrination. In the first half of the nineteenth century, educators and parents seemed to agree on expectations of social reproduction: There was a wide variety of private schools, and families paid fees only for those specific subjects that their children took. The majority of schools taught classes in Latin, modern lan-guages, and gender-specific subjects for girls such as sewing, knitting, and embroidering. In spite of the importance that official rhetoric granted to civics, Peruvian history, or national geography, few schools taught these subjects. National authorities also promoted the use of Joseph Lancaster’s teaching method and legally forbade harsh cor-poral punishments. Nevertheless, traditional drilling and individual recitation prevailed, and teachers continued using whipping as pun-ishment. Schools also organized public examinations of their students with political authorities in attendance; these ceremonies allowed school officers and teachers to create or renew clientelistic relation-ships with politicians. Students who performed well had a chance to boast in public while their families had the opportunity to gain social recognition and create patronage links of their own.

From the mid-nineteenth century, a new ideal of bourgeois con-duct and official interest in promoting patriotism and law abidance fostered changes in school culture. Schools offered a wider variety of subjects, including Peruvian history and geography, religious courses other than basic Catholic doctrine (such as the Life of Jesus Christ and Sacred History), and additional gender-specific classes (for instance, hygiene for girls). More schools taught “materias de adorno” or “fancy subjects” which could improve chances of social mobility, such as urbanity, Spanish pronunciation, and music. Parents complained when public schools did not teach these subjects. Teachers contin-ued using harsh disciplining methods that were legally forbidden, but family complaints became more frequent. Although parents used a liberal rhetoric to question these punishments, they also expressed deep concerns over patriarchal authority and family honor.

9781137338402_02_int.indd 17 11/6/2013 6:00:38 PM




In the postwar years, school culture experienced profound changes. Official nationalism and the emergence of Indigenismo renewed sub-jects and methods and introduced new school rituals. An official form of nationalism, revanchist and inclusive albeit not egalitarian, infused content and practices. More schools taught classes in Peruvian history and geography and introduced new subjects that had a strong disci-plinary component, such as gymnastics, sports, and hygiene for both boys and girls. Control over student behavior focused on surveillance and self-regulation rather than physical punishment. Political author-ities replaced public examinations with “fiestas escolares,” or public ceremonies attended by children from public and private schools on patriotic holidays. In these massive gatherings, children paraded, sang nationalistic songs, executed gymnastic demonstrations, and listened to speeches by politicians and educators. Government gave prizes to those students who showed intellectual proficiency and physical prog-ress. Fiestas escolares were part of the official effort to further identi-fication with a national community and allegiance to it.

The fifth chapter studies the development of public schooling in Lima from 1905 to 1920. The re-emergent Partido Civil was the pre-dominant political party during these years. In a context of relative political stability and growing export economy, President José Pardo centralized the administration, funding, and supervision of public primary education in 1905. The goals were expanding the support base of Second Civilismo, affirming the authority of the national gov-ernment over local powers, improving and expanding public primary education, and strengthening nationalism through schooling. The factors that permitted this process were the widespread nationalistic concern, the availability of fiscal resources, and the support of an increasing number of educators. The willingness of Pardo’s regime to invest more fiscal funds in primary schooling allowed national authorities to confiscate the educational resources that belonged to local councils.47

The second part of this chapter examines the immediate conse-quences of the 1905 centralizing code. Educational centralization effectively expanded public schooling, and enhanced the professional position of public school teachers, but also faced opposition from local power-brokers. The number of public schools in the urban areas grew, and consistent public primary education reached some rural areas for the first time. Public school teachers were assimilated into the national bureaucracy, gaining a potential degree of independence from local communities.48 The graduates of Escuela Normal Central de Varones or Teachers College for Men (founded in 1905) emerged

9781137338402_02_int.indd 18 11/6/2013 6:00:38 PM



INTRODUCTION 19

as educational specialists with official backing. Teachers College graduates, also known as Normalistas, led public educators to publish a number of pedagogical journals, carry on professional conferences, and vocally express their opinions. Normalistas undertook these ini-tiatives to gain more social prestige and to press political authorities into attending their demands.

The Civilista regimes that succeeded José Pardo’s first government faced political instability, decreasing economic resources, and oppo-sition from local powers. The new legislation formally diminished the interference of local authorities in public schooling. However, once the state had to decrease its investment in primary education, local power-holders questioned centralization. Local governments and their representatives in Congress aimed their criticism at school inspectors who reported to national authorities. At the same time, the state was unable to fulfill the expectations it fostered among Teachers College graduates and other public school teachers. The salaries of public educators were not as high as promised; conflicts between school inspectors and local councils affected teachers too. In reaction to these problems, public educators resorted to professional associa-tions and pedagogical publications to press the government for solu-tions to their problems. It was only during Augusto Leguía’s second presidential term (1919–1930) that national authorities were able to resume centralization in full.

Through the study of primary schooling, this book shows that the construction of the Peruvian state was a gradual process that involved the participation of various social actors (political and intel-lectual elites, bureaucratic officers and educators, and urban and rural families). It also proves that patronage was not antithetic to the process of state-formation and that both clientelism and national-ism were alternative hegemonic languages in Peruvian society. Finally, it demonstrates that Liberal and democratic—or republican—ideals had a limited presence in primary schooling along the period of study. Instead, day-to-day educational content and practices tended to reproduce authoritarianism, racial intolerance, and the use of vio-lence. Even when public schooling fostered a relatively inclusive form of nationalism, and granted access to education to broader sectors of the population, it was not necessarily more egalitarian or democratic in terms of contents.

Studying the development of the system of public primary school-ing in Modern Peru is relevant for practical and scholarly reasons. Although it may sound like a cliché, present governments are bound to make the same mistakes regarding education than past ones if they

9781137338402_02_int.indd 19 11/6/2013 6:00:38 PM




are not willing to learn from previous errors. For instance, one of the criticisms of current efforts at decentralization is that national authorities have not carefully considered local expectations and mate-rial and professional capacities. The history of education in Peru and the recent experience of other Latin American countries show that if national governments transfer the administration of public schools to municipal authorities without providing them with adequate finan-cial and pedagogical resources, educational availability and quality will decrease. In addition, local governments and their communities may be less willing to support and improve their schools.

In the current global situation, full completion of primary school-ing by all children is not a sufficient condition for social justice and economic progress. Yet it is certainly a necessary one. Peruvian soci-ety needs to guarantee educational inclusion and basic work skills to its citizens in order to become more fair and prosperous. Otherwise, those who have limited or no access to primary schooling end up disinvested from the national community and unable to perform profitable and fulfilling labor. According to UNICEF, the rate of completion of primary schooling from 2005 to 2009 was between 83 percent and 94 percent.49 Although the percentage of the Peruvian population that had access to primary schooling during my period of study was a minority, it was the majority of those who received any formal education at all. Determining the reasons why some attended primary schools and why others did not can provide perspective and insight into current obstacles to educational success.

9781137338402_02_int.indd 20 11/6/2013 6:00:38 PM



Acción Popular Revolucionaria Americana (APRA), 1

Acora, 169Acos, 38, 40Aimé-Martin, Louis, 53Alamos González, Benicio, 68Allauca, 109Almenara, Domingo, 151Alzamora, Isaac, 163Amaru, Tupac, 219n. 25Amazonas, 92, 112–13Ampuero, Valentín, 186Ancash, 112–13, 146, 173, 175Aponte, Pedro L., 181Apurímac, 112–13, 175Arequipa, 55, 112–13, 139, 142,

148, 169, 174–5, 177, 182–3, 187, 245n. 91

Armaza, Emilio, 189Arnao, Aurelio, 175Arze y Fierro, Fernando, 49, 51–2,

54–5Atavillos Altos, 110Aucallama, 40Aucampi, 108Auco, 108–9authoritarianism, 3, 13, 19, 44,

46–7, 136, 160, 178, 200Ayaviri, Puno region, 175, 191Ayavirí, Yauyos province, 109

Balta, José, 93, 100, 103Bard, Harry E., 174Barranco, 107Barreda, José, 160, 178

Bastinos, Antonio, 151Bayer de Nussard, Hortensia,

209n. 5Belaunde, Víctor Andrés, 4–6Benavides, Juan, 71Benavides, Oscar R., 162, 176–7Billinghurst, Guillermo, 176Binnet, Alfred, 181blacks, 15, 26, 28, 50, 60, 135–8,

175, 190, 199Bolaños, Rosario María, 108Bolívar, Simón, 52, 54, 82, 87, 89Bolognesi, Mariano, 63, 104, 154Bouroncle, Luis Humberto, 169Bridges, James, 181Bustamante, José Vicente, 92Bustamante, Juan, 62, 93Bustamante, María, 152

Cáceres, Andrés A., 37, 70, 111–12, 236n. 113, 244n. 79

Cajamarca, 112–13Calango, 37Campos, Francisco, 187Candamo, Manuel, 163Cañete, 4, 22, 31, 33, 35–7, 39, 42,

86, 89, 108, 122, 139, 170Cangallo, 188Canta, 4, 22, 31–5, 38–40, 89, 110,

139, 170, 187Capelo, Joaquín, 73, 75, 175Caracas, 129Carreño, Manuel Antonio, 129–32Carrillo, Enrique, 116Cartagena, Gregorio, 141–2

Index

9781137338402_11_ind.indd 1 11/6/2013 7:40:31 PM



278 INDEX

Cartas sobre la educación de la mujer, 132

Casapalca, 40–1Casquero de Ferreyros, Dominga,

102, 145Castilla, Ramón, 12, 26, 58–61,

83, 93–4, 97–9, 148Castillo, Juan, 188Castro y Oyanguren, Enrique,

73–4Catholic Church, 3, 13–15, 17,

24, 29, 44, 47–8, 51–4, 56–7, 59–61, 66–71, 74–6, 79, 84, 92, 100, 104, 121, 124, 128, 155, 166, 199

Cerro de Pasco, 38, 40, 212n. 39Chancay, 4, 22, 32–5, 38–40, 84,

90, 95–6, 110, 139, 170Checas, 32Chiarolanza, Aníbal, 65Chicla, 41, 215n. 71Chilca, 37, 39, 241n. 42child psychology (psicología

infantil), 180–1Chincha Baja, 122Chincha Islands, 93, 95Chucuito, 74Churata, Gamaliel, 190–1Cisneros, Adolfo, 155Cisneros, Luis Benjamín, 36, 107,

133, 148, 236n. 109Civilista Party (Partido Civil), 5,

7, 9, 18–19, 26, 34, 36, 69, 105–8, 159–64, 169, 173, 175, 178, 187, 193–4

clientelism (clientelismo), 7, 13–14, 17, 19, 80–1, 100, 117, 137, 170, 186

Coalaque, 94Coayllo, 39Colegio de Belén, 25, 59, 138Colegio de Educandas del Espíritu

Santo, 53, 209n. 5Colegio de Noel, 124

Colegio de Nuestra Señora de Guadalupe, 124, 209n. 5

Colegio de San Carlos, 57, 87, 148Colegio de Santo Toribio, 144Colegio Francés, 149Comisiones de instrucción pública,

97–9comisiones escolares, 164Constitutional Congress, 60, 65, 67Constitutional Party (Partido

Constitucional), 178, 187Cornejo, Miguel Angel, 169, 178Coronel-Zegarra, Félix Cipriano, 67Cotahuasi, 187Covarrubias, Jesús, 178criollos, 3, 6, 9, 66, 136–7curricula, Lima region

explicit, 122–35hidden, 135–48overview, 119–22postwar convergences, 148–55

Cuzco, 32, 57, 96, 112–13, 139, 174–5, 238n. 10

decency, 27–8, 53decentralization

education and, 82–92financial, 105–16

decorative subjects (materias de adorno), 121, 131–2

De La Salle Christian Brothers (Hermanos Cristianos), 74, 103–4

del Castillo, José Venancio, 110Delgado, Abel de la E., 68Delgado de Revel, Manuela, 138Demócrata Party, 162Department of Primary Instruction

(Departamento de Instrucción Primaria), 88

Deustua, Alejandro O., 73Dewey, John, 175, 180Díaz, Juan E., 151, 175Dos de Mayo school, 107

9781137338402_11_ind.indd 2 11/6/2013 7:40:31 PM



INDEX 279

Echenique, José Rufino, 60–1, 93, 97

educational centralizationoverview, 159–63Second Civilismo and, 162–73short-term consequences of,

173–92Eléspuru de Lazo, Mercedes, 68Encinas, José Antonio, 149, 169,

184, 186, 189–92Espinosa, Juan, 64–5Estado Docente (Teaching State), 1,

159–95

Ferreyros, José, 145Ferreyros, Manuel, 23, 27Feijoo, José, 50, 55Fernández Barragán, Pedro, 155Fernández de Piérola y Flores,

Nicolás de, 87Fernández, Manuel, 148Fétzer, Emilio, 154First Northern Regional

Pedagogical Conference, 183First Regional Conference of

Teachers College Graduates, 182

Freyre de Jaimes, Carolina, 69Froebel, Friedrich, 122, 154Fuentes, Manuel Atanasio, 23, 25,

120 126, 135, 141

Galván, Luis Enrique, 186Gálvez, José, 141Gálvez, Pedro, 57Gamarra, Abelardo, 170Gamarra, Agustín, 82–3, 86, 142,

147gamonales, 111, 162García, Alan, 1García-Bryce, Inigo, 156García Calderón, Francisco, 62–3García, Francisco de Paula, 115García Jordán, Pilar, 56

García y García, Elvira, 154Garrido, Cecilio A., 187General Bureau of Classrooms and

Schools (Dirección General de Aulas y Escuelas), 88

General Direction of Education (Dirección General de Estudios), 87, 97

General Office of Public Instruction (Dirección General de Instrucción Pública), 165

Giesecke, Alberto, 174González, Antonio, 52, 54González de Fanning, Teresa, 29,

68–70González de la Rosa, Toribio, 63,

115, 131González, Fray BernardinoGonzález Prada, Manuel, 29, 70,

74–5González Vigil, Francisco de Paula,

64–5, 67–8Goyeneche y Gamio, José Manuel

de, 63–4Gramsci, Antonio, 4, 8Granda, José, 222n. 70Grau, Rafael, 187Guerrero, Tomás, 74

head taxesIndian head tax (contribución

indígena), 26, 32, 60, 93, 111, 114

school head tax (contribución de escuelas), 16, 36–7, 82, 106–8

Hermoza, Nicolás, 154–5Herrera, Bartolomé, 47, 57–9Hippeau, Célestin, 71Historia Patria, 5–9Howell, David, 142–4Huacho, 40, 92, 96, 160Huancané, 62, 93, 133Huancavelica, 42, 112–13Huancayo, 40, 42

9781137338402_11_ind.indd 3 11/6/2013 7:40:31 PM



280 INDEX

Huánuco, 112–13, 139, 141, 179Huaral, 40Huaraz, 131Huarochirí, 4, 22, 33, 35, 37, 40,

110, 170, 189Huaros, 215n. 71Huascoy, 32Huaura, 40Humala, Ollanta, 1Hurtado, Casimiro, 115Hurtado, Florián, 186

Iberico, José Francisco, 175Ica, 42, 89, 92, 112–13, 139, 178Iglesias, Miguel, 111Iguaín, José Félix, 94Indians or indios, 4–6, 13, 15–16,

26, 32, 39–40, 47–8, 50–1, 57, 60–7, 71, 74–7, 83, 90, 92–3, 111, 114, 134, 136–8, 156, 190–2 194

Indigenismo, 4, 15–16, 18, 48, 62Infante, Luis C., 182, 184Iraola, Camilo, 102–3

James, William, 174, 180Jauja, 40Junín, 38, 40–2, 112–13, 186juntas de instrucción, 97

La Educación Nacional, 183–7La Lama, Miguel Antonio de, 72,

154La Libertad, 92, 112–13, 173La Mar, José de, 87Lancaster, Joseph, 17, 85, 87–91,

121, 135, 138–9, 141, 153–4La Oroya, 40–1Laraos, 36, 107, 188Larrabure, Eugenio, 39Laso, Francisco, 136Lauréntit, Eusebio, 109Lavalle, Juan de, 171Law, 164, 12, 166Leguía, Augusto B., 19, 162, 167,

173–6, 178, 182, 184, 192, 194

Lockey, Joseph B., 160, 171, 174–5, 190

López de Romaña, Eduardo, 112, 114, 163–5

Lorente, Sebastián, 58, 60–2, 66–7, 134–5, 142–5, 151

Loreto, 111–13, 236n. 114Lunahuaná, 31, 39, 42Luna, Humberto, 185Luna Pizarro, Francisco Javier de, 59Lurín, 41, 229n. 24

Macedo, Pascual Segundo, 175MacKnight, Joseph, 174–5Mala, 37, 39Málaga, Modesto, 75Mallon, Florencia, 9Marco, 186Mariátegui, José Carlos, 4–8, 45,

174Matucana, 41Maurtua, Víctor M., 178Mayurí, Vicente, 104McEvoy, Carmen, 9, 207n. 38Merino, Amador, 184mestizos, 3, 16, 50, 57, 62, 136–7,

146, 190–1Miraflores, 98, 244n. 79Molina, Facundo, 74Montalván, José Manuel, 92Moquegua, 94, 112–13Mora, José Joaquín, 53Morales Bermúdez, Remigio, 111Morales, José, 90, 92Morales, Raymundo, 132Morococha, 40

Nájera, José Miguel, 65Nasca, 86National Association of Teachers

College Graduates (Asociación Nacional de Normalistas), 182–3

nationalism, 4, 9, 12–13, 15, 18–19, 47–8, 60, 66, 69–75, 121, 149–52, 156–7, 159, 160, 172, 181, 189, 194–5, 198, 200

9781137338402_11_ind.indd 4 11/6/2013 7:40:31 PM



INDEX 281

Navarrete, José Francisco, 58, 86–91, 123

Noel, Clemente, 58

Obrajillo, 38, 110, 236n. 109official eductional ideas and goals

ambivalent republicanism, 48–59official nationalism, 69–75overview, 45–8popular instruction, 59–69

Ondina, Sílfide, 170Onofre, Antonio and Jacinto, 186Orbegoso, Luis José de, 83, 86, 91Orengo, Antonio, 58Oré y Luque, César, 185Ortiz de la Puente, S., 74Osma, Manuel, 154Oviedo, Juan, 99

Pacarán, 34, 39, 110Pacaraos (district), 39, 110Pachacamac, 41Palacios Ríos, Julián, 192Pampas, 36, 107Pardo, José, 12, 18–19, 29–30,

160, 163–7, 169, 172–3, 175, 177–9, 186, 188–9, 193–4

Pardo, Manuel, 9, 16, 26, 36, 69, 82, 103, 105, 108–9

Pardo y Aliaga, Felipe, 59Pasac, 110Pasapera, Manuel Santos, 154Pativilca, 32Patrimonialism, 13, 80, 207n. 38Patriotism, 9, 15, 17, 47, 54–5,

64–6, 71–2, 75–6, 126, 133, 150–1, 156

patronage, 13, 17, 19, 21, 43, 76, 79–81, 83, 88, 90, 92, 94, 100–1, 105–6, 108, 114, 117, 121–2, 136, 138, 148, 156, 161, 179, 182, 185–7, 194, 197, 200–1

Pazos, Juan Francisco, 71Paz-Soldán, Carlos, 154–5Paz Soldán, Mariano Felipe, 150, 152

Pedagogical Conferences (Asamblea Pedagógicas), 161, 179, 183, 94

pedology (paidología), 181Peru-Bolivia Confederation, 83,

86, 91Pestalozzi, Johann, 122, 153–4Pezet, Juan Antonio, 93, 100Piérola, Nicolás de, 87, 108–9, 111,

114, 162Pipirillago, Zulema, 170Piscobamba, 238n. 3Poiry, Isidoro, 168Polar, Jorge, 165Popular Instruction (Instrucción

Popular), 15, 47, 59–69, 76–7, 121, 126

Portal, Ismael, 172Positivism, 4–5, 15, 48, 70, 73, 76,

159, 160Prado, Mariano Ignacio, 34, 67, 93,

100, 108–9, 131Pragmatism, 180Prialé, Angel Alfredo, 185Primary Instruction Teachers

Association (Asociación de Institutores), 104

provincial treasurers (apoderados fiscales), 37

Puquina, 94

Quechua, 42, 63, 188

regional subventions (subvenciones departamentales), 31, 33–4, 36–7, 42, 197

Religious of the Sacred Hearts, 59, 220n. 44

Renan, Ernest, 73República Aristocrática or

Aristocratic RepublicRepublicanism, 9–10, 13, 15,

48–60, 65, 68, 75, 120, 135, 156, 200

Revisionism, 4, 7–9Revolución Libertadora or

Liberating Revolution

9781137338402_11_ind.indd 5 11/6/2013 7:40:32 PM



282 INDEX

Riva-Agüero, José de la, 4–5, 149, 173

Rivero y Ustáriz, Mariano de, 87Rodríguez, Bernardo, 49Rodríguez, Enrique, 145–6Rodríguez, Pedro Manuel, 115Rosas, José Domingo, 92Rosa Toro, Agustín de la, 65,

133–5, 151Rossel, Ricardo, 72

Saanppeere, Tomás, 63Salazar, Gustavo Manrique, 177Salazar, Manuel Marcos, 151Saldías, Eulogio, 72San Buenaventura, 110San José boarding elementary

school, 49San José de Surco, 114San Juan, 32San Marcos, 50, 55, 87, 147, 175San Martín, José de, 50–1, 54–5,

82, 84, 89, 140, 151San Mateo, 41San Miguel, Agripina, 71San Miguel de Vichaicocha, 110San Román, Miguel de, 93Santa Cruz, Andrés de, 83, 86, 91Santa Cruz, Domingo, 109Santa Eulalia, 41Santa Lucía de Pacaraos, 34, 39Sayán, 95, 178Sayán Palacios, Samuel, 178schooling patterns

in city of Lima, 22–30overview, 21–2number of primary schools in

Lima, 23number of primary schools in

Lima’s provinces, 33primary-school enrollment in city

of Lima, 27, 30primary-school enrollment in

Lima’s provinces, 35in provinces of Lima region,

30–42

school inspectors, 19, 29, 36–7, 40, 63, 71–2, 106–7, 109–11, 115, 131–3, 143, 146, 150, 152, 154, 164–5, 170–1, 173–8, 185–6, 189–90, 192–4, 200

Second Civilismo (Segundo Civilismo), 12, 18, 160, 162–73, 194

Seoane, Guillermo, 154, 163Sevilla, José, 107Simon, Theodore, 181Society of Primary Teachers

(Sociedad de Preceptores), 115–16, 118, 161, 179

Society of Public Assistance of Lima (Sociedad de Beneficencia Pública de Lima), 23, 25

Sors, Sebastián Ramón de, 51–2, 55–6

Soto, Augusto, 72subsidies and supervision, 92–105

Tacna, 51, 55–6, 94, 112, 149, 172

Tarapacá, 94, 149Tarma, 40Teachers College for Men (Escuela

Normal Central de Varones de Lima), 18, 87–8, 161

Teachers Training School (Escuela Central Lancasteriana de Lima), 54, 87–92, 132, 139, 153

Thompson, James, 87, 89Torres, José Luis, 72Tovar, Manuel, 39Treaty of Ancón, 111Trujillo, 174, 177, 183

Ugarte, José B., 96University of San Marcos

(Universidad de San Marcos), 87, 147, 174–5

urbanidad (good manners), 121, 128–30, 132–3

Urcullu, José de, 55–6

9781137338402_11_ind.indd 6 11/6/2013 7:40:32 PM



INDEX 283

Valderrama, Jacinto, 65Valenzuela, Manuel, 84–5Valera, Wenceslao, 187Vásquez, Máximo M., 151Vera, José, 110Vera Perea, Ciriaco, 169, 171–2,

178, 191–2Verneuil, Adriana deVillanueva, Joaquín LorenzoVillarán, Manuel Vicente, 5–6, 58,

74, 174visitadores, 106–7, 111, 164Volpone, Elena, 154voluntaristic paternalism, 107Von Tschudi, Johann Jakob, 71

War of the Pacific (1879–1883), 121–2, 148–9, 152, 156, 193

Weber, Max, 13, 80, 200, 207n. 38whipping, 17, 120, 126, 140–6, 199whites, 3, 16, 50, 135–7, 145, 190–1Wiesse, Carlos, 190Wimpffen, Emmanuel Félix de, 71

Yauli, 40, 85Yauyos, 4, 22, 31, 34–7, 42, 89,

107, 109, 139, 188Yerkes, Robert, 181

Zapata, Manuel, 125Zubiate, María, 147

9781137338402_11_ind.indd 7 11/6/2013 7:40:32 PM


antonio espinoza-education and the state inmodern peru (1821-1921).pdf

Documents

copyrighted material

primary schools

primary schooling

united states

antonio espinoza

national government

united kingdom

secondary schools