Portugal SOCIAL STRUCTURE AND SOCIAL CLASSES
Óbidos, a small town in the region of Estremadura
Courtesy Daničle Köhler
Street scene in Alfama, the oldest quarter of Lisbon
Courtesy Daničle Köhler
A fishing boat at Aveiro in northern Portugal
Courtesy Daničle Köhler
A fisherman uses cattle to draw in fishing boats at Aveiro.
Courtesy Daničle Köhler
For centuries the most distinctive feature of
Portugal's
social structure was its remarkable stability. Portuguese
society
was long cast in an almost premodern, quasifeudal mold. It
was
based on strong considerations of rank, place, and class.
The
system consisted of a small elite at the top, a huge mass
of
peasants at the bottom, and almost no one in between.
Because
Portugal's industrialization arrived so late, the country
did not
experience until late in the nineteenth century some of
the class
changes associated with rapid economic development in
other
nations. When industrialization finally did come,
Salazar's
dictatorship held its sociopolitical effects in check
almost to
the very end. Then these pent-up changes exploded in the
Revolution of 1974.
Historically, Portuguese society consisted of two
classes.
Social prestige, political power, and economic prosperity
were
based on the ownership of land. The land was concentrated
in
large estates owned by a small elite which had obtained
lands and
titles during the reconquest of the peninsula from the
Moors. As
the Portuguese armies drove the Moors farther and farther
south,
their leaders acquired rights to the use and eventually
ownership
of the lands they conquered. These titles were confirmed
by the
king in return for the landowners' loyalty and service. It
was,
in its origins, a classical feudal contract but derived in
the
Portuguese case from warfare and territorial conquest. The
Roman
Catholic Church also held vast lands. From the very birth
of
Portugal, then, landed, governmental, military, and
religious
authority were closely bound.
The rest of the population counted for very little in
this
social order. The small traditional middle class,
consisting of
soldiers, merchants, artisans, and low-level bureaucrats,
lacked
any solidarity as a class or numbers to give it political
power.
The remaining 90 percent of the population eked out meager
existences as tenant farmers, serfs, and peasants. Little
social
mobility existed. Instead, one accepted one's station in
life and
did not rebel against it; to do so was not only forbidden
but
seen as an affront to God's immutable laws. Generation
after
generation, down through the centuries, this rigid,
unyielding,
hierarchical social structure persisted.
It was not unusual that from the twelfth century
through the
fourteenth century, Portugal's formative years as a
nation, the
country was organized in this two-class system and on a
feudal
basis; that was the norm in Europe. What was surprising
was that
this class system and all its rigidities lasted through
the
seventeenth century, when the system became even more
consolidated, and beyond. During the eighteenth and
nineteenth
centuries, a "new rich" class emerged that was based on
commerce
and investment, but members of this class bought land,
intermarried with the old elite, and thus perpetuated the
two-class system.
Even in the twentieth century, despite the onset of
modernization, this structure persisted. With economic
stimulus,
a new middle class began to emerge. But it largely
imitated
upper--class ways--disdaining manual labor, cultivating
genteel
virtues, and distancing itself from the lower classes--and
was
coopted into the elite's way of thinking and behaving. In
addition, an industrial work force began to grow up
alongside the
traditional peasantry, but under Salazar its labor unions
were
kept under control, and the workers had no independent
bargaining
power. Just as the emerging middle class joined the elite,
the
emerging working class was kept down as a sort of urban
"peasantry." In this way, the essentially conservative and
two-class system of Portugal was perpetuated even into the
era of
industrialization.
Under Salazar the regime did little to ameliorate the
social
inequalities that had long existed in Portugal. Salazar
recognized that his strength lay with the conservative,
traditional elements, especially the strongly Catholic
peasantry
of the north, so he did little to increase literacy or
improve
the road system that would lead to increased mobility,
urbanization, and the eventual undermining of his power.
He also
tried consciously to keep Portugal isolated from the
modernizing
and culture-changing currents of the rest of Europe. His
corporative system brought some benefits to the workers,
but it
also kept them under the strict control of the regime.
Moreover,
during Salazar's rule, Portugal lagged even further behind
other
nations in terms of housing, education, and health care.
Several sociological studies carried out in the 1960s
confirmed that Portugal's ossified, hierarchical social
structure
continued even into modern times. One study found four
social
categories: an upper class of industrialists, proprietors,
and
high government officials accounting for 3.8 percent of
the
population; a middle stratum of rural proprietors,
military
officers, teachers, and small-scale entrepreneurs
constituting
6.9 percent; a lower-middle stratum of clerks, low-level
civil
servants, military enlisted men, and rural shopkeepers
adding up
to 27.2 percent; and a majority--62.1 percent--consisting
of
workers, both rural and urban. Another study located 1 to
2
percent of the population in the upper class, 15 to 20
percent in
the middle class, and 75 percent in the lower class. Both
studies, carried out independently, arrived at strikingly
similar
conclusions.
Yet, even with all this rigidity, class change was
beginning
to occur, as a result of the slow modernization of the
economy.
Some groups were losing their traditional status and
social power
and were being displaced by groups better able to function
in the
evolving economy. These changes can be shown through a
closer
examination of the various groups that made up the
country's
elite, middle, and lower classes.
Data as of January 1993
|