{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021222410865874362, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00933786078098472, 'mean_word_length': 5.251989389920424, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Haciendas y posesiones de la Compania de Jesus en Venezuela: El Colegio de Caracas en el siglo XVIII (review)

Jaime Torres Sánchez has done a considerable service to those interested in the eighteenth-century economy of Venezuela. This work, focused on the Jesuit properties of the Colegio de Caracas, offers a microview of two primary types of hacienda: cacao and sugar. Perhaps the most remarkable feature is his microanalysis of these operations between 1750 and 1767. The archival data, while in some respects fragmentary, nonetheless offer the possibility of reconstructing much of the economic activities of the cacao and sugar properties worked for the benefit of the Colegio. The author concludes that within this sector of the colonial economy, and restricted to the particular properties documented, haciendas worked to maximize production and income. This takes place, in his view, following an operational strategy that “privileged profit and security, and which tended to minimize costs and risks” (p. 269). He contrasts this with modern strategies that tend to reduce costs and risk. He concludes that the operating principles of the time appear to have encouraged the delegation of authority and initiative to local management, the enhancement of worker productivity, and the introduction of new technologies. The sugar hacienda in Guatire appears to reflect a particularly strong tendency to take advantage of the period’s economic circumstances through expansion and improvement, moving from the traditional trapiche form of processing to the more modern ingenio. He believes these changes were not “the result of an expanding export context, but rather the effect of a seemingly isolated business decision internal to the enterprise, even if it was stimulated by internal colonial demand” (p. 270). Finally, although the total product of the Colegio’s haciendas increased in value between 5 and 7 percent during the 1750–67 period—a reasonable increase in a declining economy—Torres Sánchez notes that the elite of Caracas did not appear to have invested much in the Jesuit Colegio after the initial founding. In short, this useful microhistory makes sense out of some rather difficult economic data and offers a persuasive discussion of the operations of these enterprises within the limited context of mid-eighteenth-century Venezuela.