Secularization in Spain: A Historical Analysis
Secularization was a process of fundamental importance in the bourgeois revolution. It meant a fundamental change in the system of ownership and land tenure. In Spain, it occurred discontinuously. Several confiscations were carried out. The most important were those of Mendizabal (1836-1851) and Pascual Madoz (1855-1924), but there were also other confiscations, such as those by Charles IV’s minister Godoy (1798), during the War of Independence, and the Liberal Triennium (1820-1823).
Enlightened reformers of the 18th century, worried about getting the most out of land and natural resources as a source of wealth and strength for the state, had suggested the need to change the manorial system of land ownership. Under the Old Regime, much of the land was in “dead hands,” that is, domains were associated with monastic lands or municipalities. In addition to not paying taxes, they could not be sold by their owners, were out of the market, and therefore could not be capitalized or improved. If agrarian reform was to be promoted, it was necessary for these lands to become private property subject to technical improvements. Moreover, the confiscation of such property would allow the state, by seizing them, to balance its trade deficit and repay debt.
This is what was done in the time of Charles IV (1798). He received permission from the Holy See to seize and sell property of the Jesuits, which came to be one-sixth of church property. This was part of the amortized hundreds of millions of public debt in real vouchers. The first step was the enactment of legislation to delink the property of the nobility and disentail church and municipal property. The process involved two phases:
- First, the state took control of those assets, so they stopped being “dead hands” (or being out of the market) to become national property.
- Then, they went to sale by auction, and the proceeds would be used by the state for its requirements, mainly to pay off debt.
Both King Joseph I and the Cortes of Cadiz decreed new confiscations, which, like those of the Liberal Triennium (1820-1823), did not survive the return to absolutism. After the death of Ferdinand VII, the bourgeois liberal revolution took hold, and in 1836, amid the Carlist civil war, Mendizabal began to sell all assets of the regular clergy (monks and nuns). In this way, they remained in state hands, and not only land but also homes, monasteries, and convents with all their belongings were auctioned off. The following year, 1837, another law expanded the action to put the goods of the secular clergy on sale.
To achieve the establishment of the new liberal regime in 1836, it was a necessary condition to win the Carlist War, and for that, they needed financial resources and support for the confiscation of the bourgeois liberal regime. Moreover, by paying off public debt, the state finances were improved and appeared more solvent, which could lead to new investments abroad to improve conditions.
Madoz’s Secularization
The secularization of Madoz began in 1855. The finance minister Pascual Madoz, a progressive, enacted his law of general confiscation. It was called “general” because it put on sale all property collectively owned, including that of ecclesiastics, which had not been sold in the previous stage, and that of the peoples themselves. The latter were called “propios” (they were properties that provided income through their lease, a rent to the council), while “commons” were those that did not provide income and were used by the locals. It was the longest confiscation in time and did not conclude until 1924.
The procedure used for sales was similar to Mendizabal’s, but there were some differences. The money raised was devoted in part to financing the country’s industrialization and the expansion of the railway. Moreover, the state did not own the property, but the municipalities did. It perceived the value of sales on behalf of these and transformed it into debt securities, which meant that the state guarded the funds of local authorities and used them for the good of all.
Consequences of the Confiscation
The confiscation brought about social changes, changes in the way of land ownership, and cultural consequences. As for social changes, the purchasing bourgeoisie became landowners. On the whole, the process of confiscations did nothing to ensure that land was allocated among the peasants; that is, land reform was not just a means of raising money for the state’s plans. But in the medium and long term, it did contribute to a greater overall volume of agricultural production, as the new owners worked land that had hitherto not been cultivated. The expulsion of peasants from the new estates and the concentration of land ownership created a great mass of landless peasants, an agricultural proletariat, which by mid-century surpassed two million people.
Changes in Land Use
It is estimated that the volume of soil affected reached up to 50% of the arable land. Secularization brought an expansion of the cultivated area and more productive agriculture. The liberalization trend and land use led to processes of investment, improvement, and specialization in crops in some areas. This release was created in horticultural farms and spread Andalusian olive groves and vineyards, largely destined for the overseas market.
Cultural Losses
Another consequence was that the confiscation produced a great loss and pillaging of cultural objects, especially from ancient monasteries. Many architectural works and properties were ruined, sold at ridiculous prices, and largely went to other countries. All this despite the fact that in 1840, a provincial committee had been established in charge of cataloging and guarding those assets.