Spanish Land Confiscations: 1833-1855
The Disentailment in Spain (1833-1855)
With the death of Ferdinand VII in 1833, Spain inaugurated a period of political liberalism. This shift included a series of basic provisions aimed at changing state law to promote freedom of work, commerce, industry, and contract. Crucially, this also involved provisions for the exploitation of land. Moderate governments, while guaranteeing property rights, sought to mobilize the vast mass of agricultural properties that had been tied to the privileged classes for centuries. This mobilization was considered a prerequisite for the modernization of the country and the articulation of a broad agricultural sector. The process can be divided into four phases:
- Under Minister Cayetano Soler.
- During the Liberal Triennium (which caused peasant discontent).
- Mendizabal’s disentailment (1836).
- Madoz’s disentailment (1855).
The first two phases involved only a few suppressed religious orders and hospitals. The latter two, however, significantly transformed agrarian property. The confiscation of ecclesiastical goods occurred in two consecutive stages:
- Decree of February 1836: Nationalization and subsequent sale of assets of the clergy residing in monasteries and convents. The causes were to:
- Fund the Carlist War (as the Church supported the Carlists).
- Improve public finances.
- Create a class of landowners with a vested interest in the triumph of the liberal cause.
- Regency of Espartero (1840-43): A law decreed the inclusion of the assets of the regular church in “national assets,” making them subject to expropriation.
- Madoz Act, 1855: The most significant and wide-reaching, this law initiated a “general confiscation,” including not only goods exclusive to the church but also those belonging to the state and municipalities. With some tweaks, occasional interruptions, and suspensions, this law took effect during the second half of the century.
Consequences of the Disentailment
The consequences were multifaceted:
- An initial injection of monetary wealth for the state, followed by increased taxation of the newly privatized lands.
- An accentuated landowning structure, as only a few could afford to buy land. Poor farmers, who needed more land, had no possibility of accessing it.
- Land ownership transferred from ecclesiastical and municipal hands to private hands, but, in general, it neither concentrated nor dispersed significantly.
- Better land use, with improved cultivation.
- An increase in production was needed to support a growing population. This population increase led to higher food prices and, consequently, increased emigration.
- The rising price of land became a new business for both new buyers and the aristocracy. The aristocracy benefited most from this process, losing the perception of their ancestral rights but gaining freehold land subject to prior *enfiteusis* (a long-term lease).
- The victims were the Church, the municipalities, and the rural poor, who often relied on communal lands or Church charity to supplement their income.
This process is considered one of the biggest missed opportunities to address a reform of the structure of land ownership. It could have reduced inequalities and encouraged greater agricultural production. It failed to meet the population’s hopes and did not lead to the industrialization of Spain.