Land Ownership and Reform in Spain’s Old Regime
The Heritage of the Old Regime
The land of the Old Regime was characterized by the dominance of land ownership by the nobility and the Church.
- The nobility, thanks to the institution of primogeniture, had established real estate and farms removed from free trade.
- The Church owned large tracts of land as a result of numerous donations. The ground was frozen and turned into “dead hands” (manos muertas).
- Municipalities were landowners whose holdings originated in royal concessions during the Reconquista. These took two forms: land for common use by the community and their own land that was leased to private individuals.
As a result, the amount of land that could be accessed by an owner had been declining and becoming increasingly expensive.
Agricultural Challenges and Rural Depopulation
The Spanish countryside was sparsely populated and in a state of ruin. The depopulation was rooted in the harshness of peasant life: overwork, low pay, weather anomalies, and lack of food reserves were an invitation to escape to the city.
The problem remained the low agricultural yields because of technical backwardness. The land was worked with a Roman plow and cultivated with the system of “año y vez” (alternate-year fallowing).
The farmer was short of capital to improve their meager equipment and auxiliary animals, hindering mechanization, the use of chemical fertilizers, or seed selection.
The situation was even more difficult if we take into account the constraints exerted by nomadic livestock agriculture, such as the persistence of old laws prohibiting plowing fenced pastureland. There were also regulations limiting the marketing of certain products or involved price controls. Since the last decades of the eighteenth century, agriculture presented pressing economic and social problems, and a fundamental and urgent need for reform.
The Disentailment Process
With disentailment laws, the aim was to unlink the assets of the nobility and pay back the Church and municipal property, which were in “dead hands.” Both actions sought the same goal: to market the assets of the nobility, the clergy, and the municipalities so that they could be sold, generating wealth and addressing the untenable shortage of public finances. These measures were to expropriate urban and rural estates of the clergy and the municipalities, nationalize them, and subsequently sell them to individuals at public auction. The State undertook to compensate the Church by taking over the expenditure of worship and clergy.
The word “desvinculación” (disentailment) was applied to goods of the laity, and “desamortización” (confiscation) to the assets of the Church.
Disentailment: A Twofold Decision
The disentailment was a double decision:
- The first was the abolition of the feudal system, which meant ending a series of relations of domination that the lords had, due to privileges granted by kings, over the inhabitants of a certain territory, and turning those lands into private and free property. The process, started in Cadiz, was long because of the many complaints and problems encountered, and concluded in 1837.
- The second measure was the abolition of primogeniture. It was only hinted at in Cadiz, and the first law addressing it was written in 1820 during the Liberal Triennium. The resistance of the nobility would delay its completion until 1841.
The seizure, first of Church property and then of the people, continued throughout the 19th century, even going into the twentieth.
Confiscation: A Two-Step Process
The confiscation involved two distinct moments:
- First, the seizure by the state of those assets, so they ceased to be “dead hands” and became national property.
- Second, the sale by auction. The state would apply the product obtained to its needs.