Spanish Land Confiscation in the 19th Century: Impacts and Outcomes

Definition

The confiscation and auction of land involving servants (city and state) and the Church developed in Spain in different stages. These centered around the attempts by Godoy, the Cortes of Cadiz, and the Liberal Triennium, culminating in two large confiscations: the ecclesiastical Mendizabal and the civil Madoz.

Spanish Country Situation

At the beginning of the 19th century, the Spanish countryside was characterized by rentier exploitation. Landowners sought income, precluding innovation. Ownership was concentrated in the peerage, Church, and municipalities, secured by primogeniture and dead hands. This resulted in uncultivated land, a restricted land market, limited crop diversity (wheat, vines, and olives), and a lack of technical innovation (fertilizers, machinery). Consequently, low productivity prevailed, relying on increased cultivation for higher yields.

Objectives

Through the confiscations, the Liberals pursued land reform to renovate the countryside (operating system, distribution, structure, technical innovation). They aimed to secure funds for liberalism, prevent absolutist resurgence (Carlist), create a landowning middle class supporting the monarchy, and establish sound public finances for modernization.

Godoy’s Actions

A precedent was the confiscation initiated during Charles IV’s reign (1798-1808). This “Confiscation of Godoy” aimed to address the treasury deficit without social or economic changes, affecting assets of confraternities, hospitals, hospices, and pious foundations.

Mendizabal and Beyond

The Cortes of Cadiz (1811-1813) attempted to seize communal lands, and the process restarted during the Liberal Triennium (1820-1823), but Ferdinand VII’s absolutist policies halted progress. The first major confiscation, under María Cristina’s Regency, aimed to finance public debt and the First Carlist War (1833-1840). Juan Alvarez Méndez’s “Mendizabal” act (1836) nullified convents and religious properties, auctioning them publicly. Other measures included removing the Mesta (1836) and abolishing estates and tithes. Flores Estrada’s rejected proposal suggested 50-year leases for settlers, with income covering debt and the state retaining ownership. During Espartero’s Regency (1840-1843), ecclesiastical confiscation was completed (1841), affecting secular clergy properties (excluding places of worship). Disentailment paused with Elizabeth II’s ascension and moderate control (Concordat of 1851). The Progressive Biennium (1854-1856) saw the second confiscation (Pascual Madoz), affecting municipal, state, and military order properties. Auctions continued, with modified payments: cash (one-fifth upfront, the rest over 15 years) or part in public debt (remainder over eight years). The Madoz Act generated substantial revenue, invested in public works, especially railways. Post-1868 governments furthered the 1855 act, completing the process by the Restoration (1874) and Calvo Sotelo’s Municipal Statute (1924).

Economically, the confiscations resulted in the sale of approximately 200,000 rural and 28,000 urban properties, generating fourteen billion reales, consolidating public finances. Forty percent of property changed hands, with three-fifths of church properties sold. Buyers were aristocrats, clergy, and bourgeoisie, some adopting rentier lifestyles. The rentier model persisted through new leases, reinforcing large estates in the south while smallholdings remained in the north. Low investment and productivity continued, though production increased through cultivated area expansion, especially in the Mediterranean. Agricultural changes occurred by the century’s end, shifting from the Mediterranean trilogy to food crops (potatoes, wheat), increased irrigation, and export-oriented production (fruits, vegetables, wine).

Socially, the intended beneficiaries (middle class and peasants) gained limited land access.