Labor Systems Used in Latin America from the Colonial Period to the 19th Century and Their Long-Term Effects

 

European colonialism, which began with Christopher Columbus's arrival in the Americas in 1492, led to profound economic, social, and cultural transformations in Latin America. Spain and Portugal quickly conquered the region and began exploiting its natural resources, extracting precious minerals, and exporting agricultural products to Europe. One of the biggest problems encountered during this process was the need for a cheap and stable workforce to maintain production across vast territories. Initially, indigenous people were forced into these jobs, but epidemics, poor conditions, and mass deaths led to a rapid decline in the indigenous population. Consequently, colonial administrations developed different labor systems to maintain economic order. These systems indelibly shaped not only production but also Latin America's social structure, racial hierarchy, and cultural identity. Even in the modern era, the continent's structural inequalities are rooted in the colonial foundations laid during this period.

 

1. The Encomienda System (Early 16th Century)

 

Definition and Application

 

The encomienda is one of the first and most characteristic labor systems of the colonial period. The Spanish crown granted it as a form of "labor right" to soldiers and settlers who served in the conquests. Spanish colonists, called "encomenderos," would take a certain number of indigenous people as "trustees," promising to protect them and convert them to Christianity in return. In practice, however, this system devolved into a system of exploitation bordering on slavery. Indigenous people were forced to work in inhumane conditions on plantations, mines, and construction sites.

 

Results

 

During the 16th century, 80% of the indigenous populations in the Caribbean, Central America, and the Andean region were wiped out. The primary causes of this destruction were harsh working conditions, malnutrition, and epidemics like smallpox brought by Europeans. Historically, the encomienda system brought European feudalism to the Americas and ushered in a tradition of large landownership in Latin America. Indigenous labor was transformed into economic power concentrated in the hands of Spanish elites, effectively eliminating smallholders.

 

 

2. Repartimiento and Mita Systems (16th–17th Centuries)

 

Repartimiento System

 

When the brutality of the encomienda system sparked reactions in Europe, the Spanish Crown implemented the repartimiento system, which made exploitation “legal.” Under this system, indigenous men were forced to work for a certain number of hours a year in mines, fields, or on public works. In theory, they were supposed to be paid, but in reality, the wages were merely symbolic. The aim was to appease the reaction of the church and public while maintaining economic exploitation. But the result remained: the indigenous people were condemned to poverty, starvation, and forced labor.

 

Mita System

 

In the Andean region (present-day Peru and Bolivia), the Spanish adapted the Inca Empire's mita system of social solidarity to their own ends. Temporary work for the common good during the Inca period evolved into forced mining during the colonial period. The best-known example is the Potosí silver mines, where thousands of indigenous workers died from high altitude, mercury poisoning, and poor conditions. These systems brought the indigenous population to the point of extinction and made the region's economy permanently dependent on Europe.

 

3. Hacienda System (17th–19th Centuries)

 

Structure and Operation

 

Over time, the encomienda system gave way to a production system based on large landholdings called hacienda. Landowners, called hacendados, forced peasants, called peons, into debt or forced them to work for low wages. While nominally free, the peasants became effectively dependent on their landowners through debt peonage (peonaje por deudas).

 

Structural Factors Shaping Social Mobility: Approaches, Criteria Most studies on social movements and political change are implicit or explicitly motivated by three broad questions: 

1. What are social movements? 
2. What are the political consequences of social movements? 
3. How do social movements achieve these consequences?
   
   Therefore, first, It would be appropriate to examine the most fundamental debate in the relevant literature, which is The question is whether social movements cause political change in the first place. First, it is possible to note that although most political sociologists argue that social movements cause political change in the first place, this appears to contradict the traditional arguments developed by the political science literature. Secondly, existing research on the political consequences of social movements must be examined comprehensively and in depth. Indeed, when the development of this topic is traced, the following observations are made: 

On the other hand, new approaches to examining social movement outcomes while on the other hand, it is almost exclusively movement-driven in public policy they focus on changes and overlook other forms of political change Third, the literature on causal mechanisms When this is done, the result is that only a small number of The scholar has advanced theories about the mechanisms by which movements create political change. Furthermore, existing research on causal mechanisms theories are based solely on social movements in northern democracies and their usefulness in understanding causal processes in other contexts is unclear

(Bidé, 2015, p. 21).

Most studies on social movements have focused on their at least It is based on the assumption that they have some degree of ability to cause political change. However, this is not a view shared by most political sociologists. Although there is an opinion, many political scientists do not agree. In fact, politics The traditional view in the science literature is that social movements are political change has little impact on the processes involved (McAdam & Su, 2002, p. 699; Mancur, 1977).  Indeed, McAdam and Su (2002, p. 696) argue that this is because political scientists have excluded alternative areas of political action and tend to focus on institutions. This is particularly true As Mouffe (2005, p. 10) argues, underestimating the importance of collective action the liberal tradition, characterized by a rationalist, individualist approach that tends to applies to scientists working within the social movement. However, Even among thinkers, the extent to which social movements cause political change remains uncertain. There is disagreement about what they do and the conditions under which they do so. Some argue that social movements are more effective than other political actors. He claims that political change has relatively little impact on the processes of political change (Burstein & Sausner, 2005; Giugni, 2007, pp. 53-77). For example, Giugni (2007, p. 54) argue that social movements, at best, are not the means for public policy change. may have a moderating effect on. This argument is based on the argument that between 1977 and 1995 Based on his study of the political consequences of peace, ecological, and anti-nuclear movements in the United States, Giugni found that in these movements, movements only influenced policy when supported by political elites and the public. Burstein and Sausner (2005, p. 406) challenge this view, arguing that collective action generally has little impact on policy change. 55. According to these thinkers, political parties and public opinion are more effective than social movements in causing policy change. The political consequences of social movements can therefore be divided into two broad categories:

(a) direct consequences, such as a change in public policy caused by the movement,

(b) indirect consequences, such as changes in public opinion on a particular issue (Cress & Within these broad categories, scientists primarily focus on policy They have developed more specific outcome typologies that focus on the outcomes of 2009, p. 412).

Indeed, William Gamson's Social Protest Strategy, published in 1975 His book, titled "The Political Consequences of Social Movements," was the first study to examine the political consequences of social movements. In this groundbreaking study, Gamson examines the history of the United States between 1800 and 1945. He studied 53 social movements in the States, which he called difficult groups and measured how successful each was in achieving its goals. Gamson, considered two factors in defining movement success: 

• “Acceptance”, in other words, whether the challenging group is accepted by those in power,

• (b) “New advantages”, in other words, whether the movement achieved its objectives (Gamson, 1975, pp. 20-29). 

Also, Gamson (1975, p. 36) stated that actions against stated goals also evaluated the success of the challenging groups and found that 38% failed and 49% found that it was successful. In other words, Gamson's study, shows that social movements cause at least some form of political change nearly half the time. thus, Frances Fox Piven and Richard Cloward, who later became known in the literature, Gamson's contemporaries, including scientists, also had a success/failure They evaluated the consequences of social movements using the dilemma (Detail for more, see Jenkins & Perrow, 1977, pp. 249-268; Piven & Cloward, 1979).

However, the usefulness of this approach was limited, as examining a movement solely in terms of its stated goals could lead scholars to undesirable conclusions. Causes one to overlook forms of political change. In addition, as Andrews (2001, p. 72) points out, the aims of social movements are inherently controversial by both participants and observers, and success complicates their definition. Furthermore, the goals of a movement often change as it develops. Therefore, over time, scholars have developed the success/failure approach They modified Gamson's pioneering work by setting aside the political change created by the movement and developing new criteria for measuring the political change created by the movement (Earl, 2000; Kriesi et al.,1995). In particular, scholars have studied movement analysis, an approach that allows them to examine the successes of social movements as well as their unintended and negative consequences. 

They started to focus on the results of political there is still no consensus in the relevant literature on how to define and measure change. It is seen that no consensus has been reached (Bosi & Uba, 2009, p. 410), because the majority of studies in the relevant literature focus on public policy focused on changes caused by the environment (Piven & Cloward, 1979, p. 33). The main because this approach is the most obvious way in which social movements can affect political change. is one of the ways and is relatively easy to measure (Burstein & Linton, 2002, p. 382). 

However, even studies that operationalize political change as changes in public policy are unable to measure the policy impact of a movement, uses different indicators. For example, in assessing the political impact of a movement, some researchers examine the accepted laws (Burstein, 1979), while others be- Topkapı Jour of Soc Sci, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2022, pp. 49–65 Gökhan AK Public expenditures for a liberal policy (Giugni, 2004). However, many scientists agree that movements can have a powerful impact on public opinion. Moreover, as McCann (1994) argues, if a movement makes political gains, If it succeeds, this success will create a “new” feeling among movement participants and citizens in general. “can foster hopes and expectations.” Indeed, in the case of the wage equality movement, both the movement participants and society more generally The phenomenon of "rights awareness" has been experienced. Again, increased capacity and rights demands in the workplace the desire to do so, both the participants in the movement and other citizens who witness the movement experienced by the movement participants. In other words, changes in political consciousness can spread beyond the movement itself and affect society Through this process, a movement can make the society in which it is located more can affect the broader political culture. Because public opinion change is a non-institutional In addition to being an outcome, it is a mechanism through which movements can achieve other forms of political change. At this stage, a question comes to mind: 

“How do social movements achieve their political results?” A social movement has no political To achieve results, it must activate at least one causal mechanism of political change. Uncovering these mechanisms allows scientists allowing them to understand how an action leads to a certain outcome, advances our understanding of the relationship between social movements and political change. For almost 25 years, researchers have been focusing more on these mechanisms. They highlight the need for scholarly attention. For example, in 2001, McAdam et al. (2001) developed static models of political change created by the movement, a model that takes into account the dynamic mechanisms operating in processes of political change approach. Others have called for a shift to a more general approach. In addition to establishing a causal relationship between the activity of a movement and a particular outcome, scientists arguing that they should define the mechanisms by which results are achieved (Andrews, 2001, p. 90; McAdam & Su, 2002, p. 700). 

However, the increasing importance of examining causal mechanisms in the relevant literature Despite this consensus, few studies actually do this. Consequently, there is little focus on how social movements lead to political change. It does not seem possible to claim that we have sufficient knowledge about it. However, several scholars have suggested that:

 (a) Disruption mechanism,

 (b) Political access

They also suggest three advanced causal mechanism models to researchers, namely 

(c) the public opinion change mechanism and 

(d) the public opinion change mechanism.

 

Economic and Social Impacts

 

The hacienda system defined the rural structure of Latin America. Agricultural production was geared towards the European market (such as sugar, coffee, cocoa, and tobacco). This created a monoculture and an economy dependent on foreign sources. Society was divided into two classes: large landowners and poor peasants. Access to education, healthcare, and social welfare became the privilege of the elite. Even after the independence movements in the 19th century, the hacienda system did not disappear; on the contrary, it formed the socioeconomic basis of new nation-states.

 

 

4. African Slavery (16th–19th Centuries)

 

Origin and Application

 

With the indigenous population declining, European colonialists brought millions of people from Africa as slaves to fill the labor shortage. Africans were employed on sugarcane, coffee, and tobacco plantations, as well as in the mines. Slaves were considered property and worked under the harshest conditions.

 

Cultural and Political Consequences

 

The African-descended population has permanently altered the ethnic and cultural makeup of Latin America. African elements have become deeply ingrained in the region's culture in music, dance, cuisine, and religion.

Slave revolts, particularly the Haitian Revolution (1791–1804), played a major role in spreading the idea of freedom throughout Latin America. However, complete abolition of slavery varied from country to country, and in some places it took until the late 19th century.

 

 

5. Long-Term Impacts: Society, Population, and Economy

 

a) Demographic Effects

 

As a result of the deaths and migrations caused by labor systems during the colonial period, the ethnic structure in Latin America changed completely. The decline of the indigenous population, combined with the population brought from Africa, gave rise to mestizo societies. Today's Latin American identity is the result of this multiplicity of origins.

 

b) Racial and Social Hierarchy

 

The colonial order created a rigid caste system among peninsulares (Spanish-born), criollos (local elites of European descent), mestizos, indigenous peoples, and Africans. This racial hierarchy persisted even in independent states after the 19th century. The roots of racism, social discrimination, and class inequality in modern Latin America date back to this period.

 

c) Economic and Political Impacts

 

Labor systems have made the Latin American economy dependent on exports. A production model focused on raw material exports has hindered industrial development. Additionally, large landowners (the hacendado class) created local power centers in rural areas, weakening state authority. This led to the emergence of the caudillo (regional leader) culture in the 19th century.

 

d) Cultural Influences

 

Colonists attempted to create cultural homogeneity by Christianizing the indigenous population, although indigenous languages (Quechua, Nahuatl) and African traditions survived. Latin American culture today is still a synthesis of this hybrid structure European, indigenous, and African elements.

 

The encomienda, repartimiento, mita, hacienda, and slavery systems in Latin America were not only instruments of economic exploitation but also structures that laid the foundations for social inequality, racial discrimination, and political dependency. These systems claimed the lives of millions of people and oppressed indigenous peoples, African slaves, and mixed-race communities for centuries.

Although independence movements in the 19th century brought an end to colonial rule, the remnants of these labor systems large landownership, class divides, lack of central authority, and external dependence remain chronic problems in modern Latin America. Understanding the social injustices, political imbalances, and cultural diversity in Latin America today is impossible without delving into the roots of these historical labor systems.

 

The history of settlement of construction communities in the American continent is quite old. Before Europeans set foot on the American continent, the continent was Regional civilizations had emerged scattered throughout the continent. partly untouched or uncivilized, home to limited primitive communities Although the Aztec civilization in Central America and the Inca civilization in the Andes Mountains along the western parts of South America continued their existence.1 However, the arrival of Europeans interrupted the development of these civilizations. prevented them from developing fully and reaching their peak. History begins with this series of events, which we call Geographical Discoveries today.

experienced a rupture and began to flow in a completely different direction.

This historical rupture was particularly painful for the indigenous peoples of this New World. This has caused the process to begin. In this article, the fundamentals of this painful process are discussed. The dynamics of this region, which extends across the continent today and is called Latin America2, will be discussed, because the foundations of the political, social and economic dynamics of this region, which is called Latin America2, are the result of this European-centered colonialism that the Spanish paved the way for. (Gotkowitz, 2007, 2011; Shesko, 2011; Grandin, 2014).

The Mayans were subjugated by the Aztecs long before Europeans reached the continent, and the Mayan culture and civilization were absorbed into the Aztecs.

The area referred to as Latin America extends from present-day Mexico to the southern part of the American continent, and some even include the Caribbean. 

Throughout this article, Latin America is often used to refer to the region encompassing Central and South America and the Caribbean, ignoring minor details. However, readers should remember that other European colonial powers maintained a presence in this region, albeit as small enclaves. 180 Journal of Cultural Studies, 16 (2023) This article examines the four main pillars of colonialism in Latin America and argues that these four elements are specific to Spanish colonialism focuses on.

 These four pillars are: 

• Slavery, 
• Racial caste system, 
• Christianization and finally
• Military superiority.

Colonialism is dominant throughout the long centuries, these four pillars have always been intertwined. As soon as the Spanish set foot in the New World, they considered themselves inferior and immediately established a hierarchical social order They began to do so. Following the Spanish, other European empires continued the same white supremacist policy. Hispanics (and Portuguese in Brazil) newly formed societies are characterized by their place of birth (Peninsulares or Criollos), their forms of mixing (mestizo or mulatto) and according to their social status (Indigenous or Negros/Black slaves) (Gotkowitz, 2011; Hordge-Freeman, 2015).4 Therefore, the caste system alone did not exclude slavery, but rather

It is an application that leans on a ground.

Europeans knew they couldn't hold on to these lands with the small number of people they could bring by ship from their own countries. Therefore, they needed to maintain military superiority, especially in areas with dense indigenous populations. According to the Treaty of Tordesillas (1494), where the caste system was urgently devised and signed under the supervision of Pope Alexander VI, the American continent was divided between the Spanish and Portuguese empires.

Its fate could be said to have been sealed by this agreement between the two Catholic superpowers at the time. Because the world's geographical features were not fully understood at the time, a large portion of the continent, planned to be divided fairly between the two empires, was fortunately left to Spain. Nevertheless, Portugal acquired a landmass (Brazil) much larger than its own surface area. However, the Brazilian territories that remained with Portugal lacked a settled civilization or a cohesive political structure. All the great civilizations that flourished throughout the American continent remained on the Spanish side. Therefore, although the Portuguese Empire was a significant colonial power in Latin America, Although this article primarily covers the region under Spanish rule, references will be made to the Portuguese Empire and Brazil when appropriate. 4 Peninsulares: A group of people born in the Iberian Peninsula who were sent to the colonies in Latin America as soldiers, officials, or administrators, forming the upper echelons of society. The term can be translated into Turkish as "Peninsulares." Criollos: The term "Creole" in Turkish refers to colonists of European descent born in Latin America. Mestizos: This term, meaning "half-breeds," describes the social group formed by the interbreeding of Europeans and Indigenous peoples. Mulattos: "Mulo" means "mule" in Spanish. This term also has a derogatory connotation, referring to those of mixed race, born of Indigenous peoples and Black slaves, who are not of European descent.

It can be translated into Turkish as "Katırımsı." The reason the natives of the New World were called "Indio" is based on Christopher Columbus's famous mistake. This term, which used to mean "Indian," is now preferred over "indinego," meaning "native." As mentioned in this article, black slaves were also transported from the African continent through the Atlantic Slave Trade.181 Journal of Cultural Studies, 16 (2023) This is one of the most important reasons why it is (Gill, 1997; Grandin, 2014;

Gotkowitz, 2007, 2011). 

The ruling elites and armies in the colonies were composed of Peninsulares [Peninsulares] sent from the Iberian Peninsula by the king. It was vital to the continuation of colonialism that other groups not receive weapons. However, the indigenous population (a significant portion of which was carried by Europeans) still carries viral even if it was broken by epidemics and massacres committed by the colonists)5, it was still much more than the colonists.6 Therefore, the inclusion of the natives in the system was vital for the continuation of the exploitation system. The only way for the natives to rise in status was through marriage with European whites. Even then, they could not advance beyond a certain level. Considering the social sentiment that this inequality could create, the colonists chose to cooperate with the chiefs of the native tribes in order to keep the natives under control (Burns, 2011: 60). These chiefs, called "caciques," were not actually betraying their people. As will be detailed in this article, epidemics, massacres, enslavement, forced labor and they were trying to give relief to their people struggling with famine. In fact, they sometimes rebelled under the oppressive effects of these conditions.

Tupak (Tupac) Amaru rebellion, which will be discussed in detail on the following pages has sprouted in such an environment. Despite all these measures, colonial empires, still unable to trust indigenous peoples, slaves, and mestizos, incorporated them into the system through another method: Christianization. The combination of the institutionality of the church and the systematic nature of the state made religious propaganda effective. The indigenous people quickly realized how powerless their own gods were in the face of the pomp of the Catholic Church. But there were still those who resisted, and the Inquisition would break this resistance (Green, 2012). Indeed, even Muslims among the slaves brought from West Africa experienced the painful consequences of the Inquisition (Qamber, 2006). The situation of Muslim slaves was particularly critical. 5 American historian Roger Daniels claims that the indigenous population of today's Mexico, which was 20 million when the Spanish arrived, declined to 1 million in just one century. 

See (Daniels, 2002: 7). For the reader's better understanding, it should be noted that when Europeans arrived in the Americas, indigenous populations were concentrated in certain regions. In other words, there was no dense human settlement across the continent. Present-day Mexico and its surrounding area were dominated by the Aztec Empire, while present-day Peru and its surrounding area were dominated by the Inca Empire. While there were cultures of various sizes in the remaining areas, they were generally untouched lands. What is being discussed here is the attitude of Europeans when encountering indigenous populations.182 Journal of Cultural Studies, 16 (2023) Muslim slaves from a written culture to their fellow Africans According to them, they were people with high organizational skills (Grandin, 2014: 195-196). That's why they caused so many problems for the colonialists. In fact, Latin Muslims in the Haitian Revolution, the first independence struggle in America Descendants of slaves have a significant share (Gomez, 2005; Grandin, 2014; Çatalbaş, 2021b; Eddins, 2022).

This article is designed to trace these fundamental dynamics and to reveal the foundations of the political and social structure of contemporary Latin America. The effects of European colonialism continued in the post-colonial period is felt in former colonial communities. Latin America's colonial history has also determined social and political relations in modern Latin America Therefore, to understand the dynamics of contemporary Latin America, it is essential to understand the historical background.

SOURCES:

 

İnan (2006). Civilian-Military Relations in the Argentinean Democratization (1983-1995). Master's Thesis. Ankara: Middle East Technical University.

Bellota, Pavel H. V. (2013). “Túpac Amaru II y el Derecho Constitucional Peruano”. Cuadernos de Investigación Universitaria, 01: 119-130.

Bonelli, Cristóbal & Vicherat Mattar, Daniela (2017). “Towards a Sociology

of Equivocal Connections”. Sociology, 51(1): 60-75.

Brown, Jonathan C. (2010). A Brief History of Argentina. New York: Facts on

File.

Burns, Kathryn (2011). “Unfixing Race”. Histories of Race and Racism: The

Andes and Mesoamerica from Colonial Times to the Present. Ed. Laura

Gotkowitz. Durham: Duke University Press, 57-71.

Çatalbaş, Adem Üstün (2021a). “Coğrafya, Kast ve Etnisite: İki Bolivya Üzerine Bir Deneme”. Sosyoloji Divanı Dergisi, 8(16): 311-324.

Çatalbaş, Adem Üstün (2021b). “Mühtediler, Beynamazlar ve Hariciler:

Amerika Birleşik Devletleri’nde Müslüman Olmak ve İslami Yaşam Deneyimleri-Clifton Camii Örneği”. Din Sosyolojisi Araştırmaları Dergisi.

1(1): 43-62.

Çatalbaş, Adem Üstün (2021c). “Mabetler, Müminler ve Tanrılar Üzerine:

Birinci Fasıl”. Mahalle Mektebi Dergisi, 10(59): 81-84.

Çatalbaş, Adem Üstün (2022). Militarization, Democratization and Concordance: The Role of Citizenry in (Re-) Establishing Democracy in Argentina and Turkey. Konya: Çizgi Yayınevi.

Chambers, Sarah C., & Chasteen, John C. (eds.). (2010). Latin American

Independence: An Anthology of Sources. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing.198

Kültür Araştırmaları Dergisi, 16 (2023)

d'Altroy, Terence N. (2014). The Incas, Vol. 13. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Daniels, Roger (2002). Coming to America: A History of Immigration and

Ethnicity of American Life. New York: Harper Collins.

de Las Casas, Bartolome (1992). The Devastation of the Indies: A Brief Account. Baltimore, Maryland: JHU Press.

Diamond, Jared M. (1997). Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. New York: W. W. Norton.

Eddins, Crystal N. (2022). Rituals, Runaways, and the Haitian Revolution:

Collective Action in the African Diaspora. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fausto, Boris & Fausto, Sergio (2014). A Concise History of Brazil. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Gill, Lesley (1997). “Creating Citizens, Making Men: The Military and Masculinity in Bolivia”. Cultural Anthropology, 12(4): 527-550.

Gomez, Michael A. (2005). Black Crescent: The Experience and Legacy of

African Muslims in the Americas. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Gotkowitz, Laura (2007). A Revolution for Our Rights: Indigenous Struggles

for Land and Justice in Bolivia, 1880-1952. Durham: Duke University

Press.

Gotkowitz, Laura (2011). “Introduction”. Histories of Race and Racism: The

Andes and Mesoamerica from Colonial Times to the Present. Ed. Laura

Gotkowitz. Durham: Duke University Press.

Gouda, Frances (2008). “Colonial Encounters, Body Politics, and Flows of

Desire”. Journal of Women's History, 20(3): 166–180.

Grandin, Greg (2011). The Last Colonial Massacre: Latin America in the Cold

War. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Grandin, Greg (2014). The Empire of Necessity: Slavery, Freedom, and Deception in the New World. New York: Metropolitan Books.

Green, Toby (2012). “Policing the Empires: A Comparative Perspective on

the Institutional Trajectory of the Inquisition in the Portuguese and

Spanish Overseas Territories (Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries)”.

Hispanic Research Journal, 13(1): 7-25.

Hamnett, Brian R. (2004). A Concise History of Mexico. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Çatalbaş, Adem Üstün. (2023). Latin Amerika’da Fetih, İsyan ve Ölüm: Sömürgecilik Döneminde İspanyol Yönetimi ve Yerli Mücadeleleri. Kültür Araştırmaları Dergisi, 16, 179-200.

Lockhart, J., & Schwartz, S. (1969). Encomienda and Hacienda: The Evolution of the Great Estate in the Spanish Indies. Hispanic American Historical Review, 49(3), 411-431.

Monteiro, J. (2005). “Labor Systems.” In V. Bulmer-Thomas, J. Coatsworth & R. Cortés-Conde (Eds.), The Cambridge Economic History of Latin America (pp. 185-234). Cambridge University Press.

Yeager, T. J. (1995). “Encomienda or Slavery? The Spanish Crown’s Choice of Labour Organization in Sixteenth-Century Spanish America.” The Journal of Economic History, 55(4), 852-877.

Brown, Jonathan C. (2010). A Brief History of Argentina. New York: Facts on File.

Grandin, Greg. (2014). The Empire of Necessity: Slavery, Freedom, and Deception in the New World. New York: Metropolitan Books.

Fausto, Boris & Fausto, Sergio. (2014). A Concise History of Brazil. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

d’Altroy, Terence N. (2014). The Incas. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Hamnett, Brian R. (2004). A Concise History of Mexico. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Aşgaş Yarar, H. (2013). Latin Amerika’da İspanyol Sömürgeciliği ve Simón Bolívar’ın Özgürlük Mücadelesi. History Studies Dergisi.

Kalfa Topateş, A. (2020). Latin Amerika Ülkelerinde Enformel Sektör, Sosyal Güvenlik ve Örgütlenme. Emek Araştırma Dergisi.

 

 

EDANUR AYDIN

REGIONAL ANALYSIS COMMUNITY

POLITICAL SCIENCE AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

MUGLA SITKI KOCMAN UNIVERSITY