Politics of Race in Argentina During Colonial Times and in the Nineteenth Century

The dynamics of racial categorization are different in every country, and even within one nation they can vary. In order to understand the politics of race in Argentina it is essential to understand that race is subject to change.

Andrews describes the nineteenth century porteño society as strictly divided along racial lines and resembling “the composition of any Spanish American city during the late colonial and early national periods” (Andrews 17). Argentine society during colonial times, and even later, could be differentiated between the gente decente (the ruling upper strata of society) and the gente del pueblo (all porteños that were not accounted as gente decente) (17). In addition to this binary differentiation, society in all of Spanish America was internally stratified by the Regimen de castas (caste system) (17f.). The gente decente were a racially homogenous group of usually white ancestry and represented society’s ruling class. In contrast the gente del pueblo, who were a disunited group of different ethnicities at the bottom of which were the slaves. Blacks and indigenous people were superior to slaves, while mestizos (individuals with mixed Spanish and Indigenous ancestry) and mulatos (individuals with mixed Spanish and African ancestry) formed the class between the most inferior ethnic groups and the gente decente (18). Argentines further differentiated between Europe-born whites, who were superior to American-born whites, and Argentina-born blacks and slaves that came directly from Africa (18.). People of mixed racial heritage were generally referred to as castas, and ironically all people of African origin were also automatically categorized as castas (Rout 127). The Regimen de castas, a set of laws and restrictions in every field of daily life, was created to maintain this social hierarchy by denying access to certain resources to all castas – some of them more, some a little less (126f.).

By denying access to certain resources the system of castes functioned on one hand as a system of races, as ancestry determined what caste someone belonged to, but on the other hand simultaneously as a system of social classes (126f.). By categorizing someone racially one would automatically categorize him socially, as his racial ancestry would determine his role in society along with his access to social and economic resources. This system ranked people “in terms of their proximity to a white appearance” (132), which would automatically place dark-skinned people in the bottom tier of the hierarchy (132).

Argentine social hierarchy was further complicated by the possibility of moving between racial categories and therefore also between the castas (Andrews 1980, 81). Slaves had the general possibility of buying their own freedom, which would, as dictated by the Regimen de Castas, socially place them superior to black slaves (72). Additionally, Afro-descendants could be socially accepted as white, either by a social standing they gained within the porteño society or based on a system established by the Spanish Crown, referred to as Gracias a Sacar (roughly translated to “Thanks for the Exclusion”). This system offered the possibility for non-whites to “legally purchase the racial labels and prerogatives of white people” (82). With increasing mestizaje the porteño racial system changed too, and a new racial category emerged: the trigueño (wheat colored, neither black nor white) (83f). This intermediate category might, according to Andrews, have often been used in the census instead of “Afro-descendant” or negro, and might therefore have contributed to the statistical decline of the Afro-descendant population in Argentina (89).

Afro-descendants would have had every reason to try to either hide their African ancestry by labeling themselves trigueño, or by trying to be accepted into the white society. You should note that this was not common, nor did it happen on a regular basis. The rules and restrictions forced upon non-whites in nineteenth century Buenos Aires were extensive, as Andrews illustrates by listing a fraction of them:

“The Afro-Argentines of Buenos Aires, along with the blacks of the rest of the empire, were forbidden to carry arms, wear certain types of clothing such as silks, lace, or pearls, walk through city streets after nightfall, hold civil, ecclesiastical or military office, buy or sell alcohol, be educated in the same schools as whites, and so on and on in a list that must have seemed ad infinitum to the people who lived under its dictates” (45).

Andrews further highlights that the “city consistently ignored the rights of its black citizens whenever it was economically or politically convenient“ (Andrews 63) as can be observed when considering the time it took to actually abolish the slave trade and slavery in Buenos Aires.

Both during and after slavery, blacks only had limited access to resources such as employment, residence, and education. They usually lived in the least desirable buildings and neighborhoods (80). Afro-descendants, both free and enslaved, usually worked the lowest level jobs in the industrial or agricultural sector and even after slavery and the Regimen de castas were abolished, the “least desirable, most degrading, unhealthiest, and worst- paying jobs were reserved for the Afro-Argentines” (39).

Rout emphasizes that access to education was very limited for Afro-descendants during the first half of the nineteenth century (Rout 145). Even in 1810, when the first measurements for the abolishment of slavery were taken in Argentina, schools in Buenos Aires would stay segregated (145). It was not until the 1850s that public boys schools allowed children of African descent into their halls, and even at that point they would never be considered equal to white students. Ultimately as late as 1882, no black student had graduated from the University of Buenos Aires (Andrews 60).

Andrews argues that when in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries millions of European immigrants came to Argentina, especially to Buenos Aires, blacks had to compete with immigrants over the few resources available to them, e.g. housing, employment and education (Andrews 183ff.). Lea Geler on the other hand, finds evidence in Afro-Porteño newspapers illustrating how immigrant and Afro-Porteño communities intermingled and built relationships. She especially highlights that the contact between the two groups led to intermarriages between Afro-Porteños and European immigrants, and eventually to mutual accommodation (Geler “Pulenta Con Candombe”, 163ff.).

Andrews concludes that considering all of these restrictions, prejudice and abuse the “stigma of black ancestry was a heavy cross to bear in the society of Buenos Aires“ (Andrews 83).