¹ Examples of this position are too numerous to cite. It should suffice to note that they range from the early studies of Zea, Leopoldo such as El positivismo en México (México: El Colegio de México, 1943), and Apogeo y decadencia del positivismo en México (México: El Colegio de México,)Google Scholar to the recent collection of essays edited by Woodward, Ralph Lee Jr., entitled Positivism in Latin America, 1850–1900 (Lexington, Mass: D. C. Heath and Company, 1971).Google Scholar For a definition of positivism and an analysis of Zea’s works see Raat, William D., “Leopoldo Zea and Mexican Positivism: A Reappraisal,” Hispanic American Historical Review 48 (February 1968): 1–18. Google ScholarSee also Hale, Charles A., “Sustancia y método en el pensamiento de Leopoldo Zea,” Historia Mexicana 20 (Oct.-Dec. 1970) : 285–304.Google Scholar

² The philosophical debate about the nature of ideas and whether or not ideas are or can be functional cannot be entertained in this context. In an earlier essay I have concerned myself with the philosophical and methodological problems of intellectual history and the history of ideas. See Raat, William D., “Ideas e historia e México: Un ensayo sobre metodología,” Latino América 3 (1970): 175–188.Google Scholar

³ The statistics come from Cosío, Arturo Gonzáez, “Clases y estratos sociales,” in México, cincuenta años de revolución: La vida social (México: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 1961): 55.Google Scholar See also Navarro, Moisés González, El Porfiriato: La vida social in Historia moderna de México, ed. by Daniel Cosío Villegas (México: Editorial Hermes, 1970) : 383–399 Google Scholar; Enríquez, Andrés Molina, Los grandes problemas nacionales in Problemas Agricolas e Industrialesde México 5 (January-March 1953): 26–34 & 122–24Google Scholar; Wilkie, James W., The Mexican Revolution: Federal Expenditure and Social Change Since 1910 (Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California, 1967), p. 203.Google Scholar

⁴ The urban-rural characteristics of the traditional hacienda are treated by Lockhart, James in his essay “Encomienda and Hacienda: The Evolution of the Great Estate in the Spanish Indies,” Hispanic American Historical Review 49 (August 1969): 411–429.Google Scholar For examples of regional studies see the following: For San Luis Potosí see Cockcroft, James D., Intellectual Precursors of the Mexican Revolution (Austin: University of Texas, 1968), pp. 13–34.Google Scholar For Chihuahua, Meyer, MichaelC., Mexican Rebel (Lincoln: University of Nebraska, 1967), pp. 9–15 Google Scholar; Sims, Harold D., “Espejo de caciques: Los Terrazas de Chihuahua,” Historia Mexicana 18 (January-March 1969): 379–399 Google Scholar; Beezley, William, “Opportunity in Porfirian Mexico,” North Dakota Quarterly 40 (Spring 1972) : 30–40.Google Scholar For the Reyistas of Nuevo León and Coahuila see Bryan, Anthony T., “Mexican Politics in Transition, 1900–1913: The Role of General Bernardo Reyes” (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Nebraska, 1970), pp. 21–270.Google Scholar

⁵ As Oscar Lewis notes, this does not mean that there weretwo distinct social classes within the village, only that there were rich and poor and a general awareness of differences in economic and political status. See Lewis, , Life in a Mexican Village (Urbana: University of Illinois, 1970), pp. 54–55 & 430–431.Google Scholar

⁶ Gonzáez Navarro, pp. 387–393.

⁷ Biographical data taken from Diccionario Porrúa (México: Editorial Porrúa, S. A., 1964).

⁸ Salmerón, Fernando, “Los filósofos mexicanos del siglo xx,” in Estudios de historia de la filosofía en México (México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, 1963) : 281.Google Scholar

⁹ Navarro, Moisés González, “La ideología de la revolución mexicana,” Historia Mexicana 10 (April-June 1961): 631–634.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Cockcroft, pp. 55–88.

¹¹ Davies, James C., “Toward a Theory of Revolution,” American Sociological Review 27 (February 1962) : 5–19 and Smelser, Neil, Theory of Collective Behavior (New York: Free Press of Glencoe, 1963), pp. 18–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Both Davies and Smelser have been subject to criticism from their peers in the profession. Davis’ so-called J-curve of rising expecta-tions has been tested by Raymond Tanter and Manus Midlarsky with results which run counter to his propositions. Some theorists argue that after a country reaches a certain economic base, political instability decreases with continuing economic development. In any case the crucial idea of economic reversal, so basic to Davies’ position,was not considered in these analyses. Smelser has been criticized for having an antidemocratic bias which considers collective behavior, especially revolution, irrational. For the critique of Davis see Bwy, D. P., “Political Instability in Latin America: The Cross-Cultural Test of a Causal Model,” Latin American Research Review 3 (Spring 1968) : 17–66.Google Scholar For a critique of Smelser see Currie, Elliott and Skolnick, Jerome H. , “A Critical Note on Conceptions of Collective Behavior,” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 391 (September 1970) : 34–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar That same issue features a rebuttal by Smelser entitled “Two Critics in Search of a Bias”: 46–55. For a general survey of the historical literature of the Mexican Revolution, which treats both underlying and immediate causes, see Blasier, Cole, “Studies of Social Revolution: Origins in Mexico, Bolivia, and Cuba,” Latin American Research Review 2 (Summer 1967) : 28–64.Google Scholar

¹² Rhodakanaty, Plotino C., Cartilla socialista (México: Imprenta de V. G. Torres, 1861), 16 pp.Google Scholar For an analysis of Rhodakanaty see either Valadés, José C., “Noticia sobre el Socialismo en México durante el siglo XIX,” in Cartilla Socialista (MéxicoQ: 1968), pp. 5–35 Google Scholar or Hart, John, “Anarchist Thought in Nineteenth Century Mexico” (Ph.D. diss., University of California, 1970), pp. 31–49.Google Scholar

¹³ For a general description of economic development during the Porfiriato, see Vernon, Raymond, The Dilemma of Mexico’s Development (Cambridge: Harvard Uni-versity, 1963), pp. 38–58.Google Scholar

¹⁴ This data measures productivity in terms of millions of pesos and is based on 1950 prices. See López, Enrique Pérez, “El producto nacional,” in México, cincuenta años de revolución: La economía (México: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 1960), p. 587.Google Scholar For a critique of Pérez López, especially “upward bias,” and a general discussion of the problems and limitations of statistical data see Keesing, Donald B., “Structural Change Early in Development: Mexico’s Changing Industrial and Occupational Structure from 1895–1950,” Journal of Economic History 29 (Dec. 1969) : 716–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁵ Vernon, pp. 52–55.

¹⁶ Moisés González Navarro, La vida social, pp. 19–35; 72–82; 415–434.

¹⁷ Ibid., pp. 298–300.

¹⁸ White, Robert A., “Mexico: The Zapata Movement and the Revolution,” in Latin American Pleasant Movements, ed. by Landsberger, Henry A. (Ithaca and London: Cornell University, 1969), pp. 103–104.Google Scholar See also Womack’s, John Zapata and the Mexican Revolution (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1969).Google Scholar

¹⁹ Paz, Octavio, The Labyrinth of Solitude (New York: Grove Press, 1961), p. 137.Google Scholar

²⁰ For a general description of the Limantour-Reyes conflict which analyzes Reyes’ motivation see again Bryan, Anthony, “Mexican Politics in Transition,” pp. 96–100 and 218–270.Google Scholar For a “científico” view see Limantour, José Yves, Apuntes sobre mi vida pública (México: Editorial Porrua, S.A., 1965), pp. 105–152.Google Scholar For the poor condition of the military during the Porfiriato see Lieuwen, Edwin, Mexican Militarism (Albu-querque: University of New Mexico Press, 1968), pp. 1–12.Google Scholar

²¹ See Leiden, Carl and Schmitt, Karl M., The Politics of Violence: Revolution in the Modern World (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1968), pp. 19–35.Google Scholar

²² White, Robert, “Mexico: The Zapata Movement,” p. 104.Google Scholar

²³ Tannenbaum, Frank, Mexico, The Struggle for Peace and Bread (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1964), p. 49.Google Scholar See also lasier, Cole B, “Studies of Social Revolution,” p. 39.Google Scholar

²⁴ This interpretation follows the definition and model ofrevolution outlined by Amman, Peter in his essay “Revolution: A Redefinition,” Political Science Quarterly 77 (March 1962) : 36–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁵ See Waxman, Chaim I., The End of Ideology Debate (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1968), esp. pp. 3–4.Google Scholar See also Shils, Edward, “The Concept and Function of Ideology,” in the International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, ed. by David Sills,7 (New York: Macmillan Co. and The Free Press, 1968) : 66–76; and Parsons, Talcott, The Social System (Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1951), pp. 326–383.Google Scholar

²⁶ For a discussion of types of ideas see Shils, , “The Concept and Function of Ideology,” pp. 66–73.Google Scholar

²⁷ For a general discussion of the National Preparatory School see again Navarro, Moisés González, La vida social, pp.607–632.Google Scholar See also Noriega, Alfonso, Vida y obra del doctor Gabino Barreda (México: Libreria de Manual Porrua, S.A., 1969), pp. 93–124 and Chávez, Ezequiel A., “La reorganización de la Escuela Nacional Preparatoria” in Mexico, su evolución social, ed. by Sierra, Justo, 1, pt. 2 (México: J. Ballescá y Compania, 1902) : 572–576.Google Scholar For education in general during the Porfiriato see de Knauth, Josefina Vázquez, Nacionalismo y educación en México (México: El Colegio de México, 1970), pp. 44–126.Google Scholar

²⁸ Two examples of academic groups, both of which published annals and journals, would be Sociedad Metodófila Gabino Barreda for the early Porfiriato and the Sociedad Positivista for the period after 1900. For a description of the activities of the first group see Flores, Manuel, “Apéndice: Gabino Barreda, apuntes biográficos,” La Tribuna (México), Nov. 19, 1880.Google Scholar For the Sociedad Positivista see Aragón, Agustín, “La conmemoración en México del 49 aniversario de la muerta de Augusto Comte,” Revista Positiva 6 (Sept. 1906) : 546–547 and Aragón, , “La vida y la obra de Augusto Comte,” Revista Positiva 7 (Sept. 1907) : 575–603.Google Scholar

²⁹ The enterprising scholar can have a field day in Mexico’s national collection of newspapers located in Mexico City and known as the Hemeroteca Nacional. For the Porfiriato one can find newspapers representing several political and ideological views. Note the following examples: For labor views see El Diablito Bromista, El Diablito’ Rojo, and La Palanca. For radical labor ideas, including both anarchism and socialism, see for the early Porfiriato El Socialista (until 1886) and El Hijo del Trabajo (also until 1886). For the later Porfiriato see El Hijo del Ahuizote edited by Daniel Cabrera, El Ahuizote Jacobino, Camilo Arriaga’s Renacimiento, and Flores Magón’s Regeneracion. For reform liberalism see El Diario del Hogar, El Partido Democrático, El Antirreeleccionista, and La República. For scientism during the early Porfiriato see La Libertad. For the conservative Catholic voice see either La Voz de México or El Pais. Finally the government press consisted in El Mundo, El Mundo Ilustrado, El Imparcial, and El Universal. Many newspapers supported the regime including El Debate, El Diario, and La Reelección. For a general survey of newspapers in Diaz’s Mexico see both Henry Lepidus, The History of Mexican Journalism in the University of Missouri Bulletin 29 (1928): 54–69, and Mario Rojas Avendaño, “El Periodismo,” in Mexico, cincuenta años de revolución: La cultura (México: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 1962): 604–621.

³⁰ See Turner, Frederick C., The Dynamic of Mexican Nationalism (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1968), pp. 53–100.Google Scholar For historical literature of the Porfiriato see both O’Gorman, Edmundo, “La historiografía,” in México, cincuenta años de revolución: La cultura, pp. 197–203 and de Knauth, Josefina Vázquez, Nacionalismo y educación en México, pp.97–125.Google Scholar

³¹ See, for example, Villegas, Daniel Cosío, “El porfiriato, era de consolidación,” Historia Mexicana 13 (July-Sept. 1963): 76–87.Google Scholar

³² See both of the following by Hale, Charles: “José María Luis Mora and the Structure of Mexican Liberalism,” Hispanic American Historical Review 45 (May 1965): 196–220 and Liberalism, Mexican in the Age of Mora (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1968), pp 39–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³³ Several examples can be found in various issues of La Libertad and the Revista Positiva. See especially Hammeken, Jorge y Mexía, , “La política positiva y la política metafísica,” La Libertad, August 12 and 20, 1880 Google Scholar; and Barreda, Horacio, “La Escuela Nacional Preparatoria,” Revista Positiva 8 (April, May, June & July 1908): 232–286; 305–381; 385–437; 449–506.Google Scholar

³⁴ Hale, , “José María Luis Mora,” pp. 208–220.Google Scholar

³⁵ This is the importance of the union of a liberal like Arriaga with an anarchist like Flores Magón, a union which lasted until 1906.

³⁶ Breymann, Walter N., “The Científicos: Critics of the Diaz Regime, 1892–1903,” Proceedings of the Arkansas Academy of Sciences 7 (1954): 91–97.Google Scholar

³⁷ This is an observation derived from an examination of many of the writings of the científicos. Some of the more important include the following: Limantour, Correspondencia, 1848–1911 (402 letters, var. sizes). Garcia Collection of the University of Texas Library; Limantour, “Discurso … pronunciado en la ceremonia de Clausura del Concurso Científico Nacional,” Revista Positiva 1 (Feb. 1, 1901): 54–63; Limantour, Apuntes sobre mi vida pública, pp. 16–22, 73–152, 229–239; Miguel Macedo, “Discurso … ,” Revista Positiva 1 & 2 (Jan. 1, 1901 & Feb. 1, 1902): 1–20 & 36–42; Bulnes, El porvenir de las naciones latino-americanas (México: Pensamiento vivo de América, n. d.); Bulnes, El verdadero Díaz y la revolución (México: Eusebio Gómez de la Puente, 1920), pp. 98–169; Bulnes, , The Whole Truth About Mexico (New York: M. Bulnes Book Co., 1916), esp. pp. 119–120 Google Scholar; Bulnes, , Los grandes problemas de México (México: Editorial El Universal, 1926), p. 329 Google Scholar; Creel, Enrique, “Conferencia del Lago Mohonk sobre arbitraje internacional,” Revista Positiva 7 (Sept. 1907) : 565–574 Google Scholar; Flores, Manuel, “Ensayos sobre la educación,” La Libertad, April 25, 1879 Google Scholar; Flores, , “La Libertad,” El Mundo Ilustrado, March 3, 1907 Google Scholar; Sierra, Justo, “Las garantias individuales,” La Libertad, January 3, 1879 Google Scholar; Sierra, , Evolución política del pueblo mexicano (México: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 1940), pp. 269–276.Google Scholar

³⁸ For a description of the positivist creed and an analysis of their movement see Raat, William D., “Agustín Aragón and Mexico’s Religion of Humanity,” Journal of Inter-American Studies 11 (July 1969): 441–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁹ This is a thesis which I have demonstrated in another context. This conclusion is supported by the research efforts of Martin Stabb and T. G. Powell. See the following: Raat, William D., “Los intelectuales, el positivismo y la cuestión indígena,” Historia Mexicana 20 (Jan.-March 1971): 412–427 Google Scholar; Stabb, Martin S., “Indigenism and Racism in Mexican Thought: 1857–1911,” Journal of Inter-American Studies 1 (Oct. 1959): 405–423 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Stabb, Martin, In Quest of Identity (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1967), pp. 44–57 Google Scholar; Powell, T. G., “Mexican Intellectuals and the Indian Question, 1876–1911,” Hispanic American Historical Review 48 (Feb. 1968): 19–36.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ See Raat, ibid. For a discussion of the differences between “Indianism,” European indigenism, and liberal indigenism, see Rui, Ramón Eduardo, Mexico, The Challenge of Poverty and Illiteracy (San Marino, California: The Huntington Library, 1963), pp. 123–141.Google Scholar

⁴¹ See the following works by Pedro Didapp, Juan: Partídos políticos de México (México: Libreria Española, 1903), pp. 183–216, 224–225, 254Google Scholar; Explotadores políticos de México (México, Tip. de los Sucs, de Francisco Díaz de León, 1904), pp. 669–671; Gobiernos militares de México (México: 1904).

⁴² For some examples of clerical anti-positivism, see the following: Cárlos, Rafael, “Refutación de los errores dominantes,” La Voz de México, Feb. 5, 1892 and April 27, 1892Google Scholar; Gamboa, Ignacio, El positivismo filosófico y su influencia en el estado actual de la sociedad humana (Yucatan: Imprenta “Lorede Mola,” 1899), pp. 17–68 Google Scholar; Zavala, Francisco, El socialismo y la iglesia (Guadalajara: Imp. de “El Regional,” 1907), pp. 3–7 Google Scholar; Zavala, , El positivismo (Guadalajara: Tip. de “El Regional,” 1909), pp. 3–5 and 36–38Google Scholar; Zavala, , “Criticismo,” La Voz de México, Dec. 29, 1908 Google Scholar; Jesús Cuevas, José de, El positivismo en México (Zacatecas: Tip. del Comercio, 1885), pp. 24–42.Google Scholar

⁴³ For Spanish Krausism see Morillas, JuanLópez, El Krausismo español (México: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 1956).Google Scholar Also see Larroyo, Francisco and Escobar, Edmundo, Historia de las doctrinas filosóficas en Latinoamérica(México: Editorial Porrúa, 1968), pp. 125–127; and Miguel Jorrín, and Martz, John D., Latin-American Political Thought and Ideology (Chapel Hill: Univ. of North Carolina Press, 1970), pp. 154–156.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ For the Vigil-Parra debate see the following: Vigil, José M. and de la Peña, Rafael Angel, Discursos pronunciados en la Escuela Nacional Preparatoria (México: Imprenta del Gobierno, en Palacio, 1885)Google Scholar; Para, Porfirio, “La lógica de Bain y los profesores sus enemigos,” La Libertad, July 16, 1880.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Cumberland, Charles C., Mexican Revolution: Genesis Under Madero (Austin: Universityof Texas Press), pp. 33–35.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ For examples of anti-positivism in labor and radical publications see the following: “Los Científicos,” in El Diablito Bromista, Nov. 27, 1904; “Positivismo y Pesetivismo,” in El Diablito Rojo, April 6, 1908; “Amor y positivismo,” in El Diablito Rojo, March 11, 1901; and the following issues of El Hijo del Ahuizote, July 6, 1902; Jan. 28, 1894; March 3, 1889; August 9, 1896; August 16, 1896; August 30, 1896; Jan. 15, 1899; Dec. 14, 1902; Jan. 4, 1903.

⁴⁷ See again Jorrín, and Martz, , Latin-American Political Thought and Ideology, pp. 191–196; 207–213.Google Scholar Also see again White, Robert A., “México: The Zapata Movement and the Revolution,” pp. 122–129.Google Scholar