Hijos del Pueblo is a redo with nearly the same title as Deborah Kanter’s 1993 doctoral dissertation. For the book, she has added some 20 years to her study, through the Mexican-American War. Her purpose is to study women and how their lives changed during the post-independence era. She selected Toluca, a sizable region west of Mexico City, which was always too close to the capital to become a distinct, independent entity yet maintained its rural character. It was a district of maize and maguey that shifted somewhat to livestock ranching and then in the nineteenth century to intensive agricultural production. By the Porfiriato, one town in the Toluca basin, Tenango del Valle, was the most populous in the state of Mexico.As expected, Kanter finds great continuity of colonial practices over the period studied, but she also observes increasing disadvantage for some sectors of society. She depends largely on Spanish-language court cases to furnish the most comprehensive account possible of “gender, family, and mentalités” (p. 3). Villages comprised Toluca, and the great majority of their inhabitants were natives, most of whom were Nahuatl speakers who had inhabited the region for centuries. Two recent publications have brought to light information about Toluca’s Nahuas through translation and analysis of a treasure trove of last wills and testaments (Caterina Pizzigoni, Testaments of Toluca, 2007; and Miriam Melton-Villanueva and Caterina Pizzigoni, “Late Nahuatl Testaments from the Toluca Valley: Indigenous-Language Ethnohistory in the Mexican Independence Period,” Ethnohistory 55, no. 3 [2008]: 361 – 91). These documents are exemplary for their insights into community, ethnicity, family, religion, women, and change well into the 1820s, yet Kanter inexplicably and unfortunately omits any reference to these important works.As native populations recovered and the number of Hispanics also grew during the last century of the colonial period, the need for land for subsistence, to say nothing of a market surplus, increased exponentially. Expansive Spanish-owned haciendas tended to control water and grazing rights, and their majordomos not infrequently abused any villagers who protested. But rather than take up arms, individuals and town officials depended on the courts for redress, as they had for centuries. Even when the Indian Court was abolished in the 1820s and political ideology and practice shifted away from the ancient traditions of paternalism and indigenous corporatism, native peoples expected, sought, and often received justice from the local courts.Patriarchy is a prevailing leitmotiv in this work, and Kanter finds it generally to have served Toluca’s community well over the longue durée. The supreme patriarchs, the king and the pope, represented age-old institutions whose reach extended all the way to local cabildo magistrates and parish priests, who influenced the goings-on in the village and beyond. But patriarchy was subject to the vagaries of time, and where once the parish priest used the Spanish institution of depósito, for example, to sequester and protect a woman from abusive relatives, another priest, a willful one, or local official, might lock a women up to punish her, even though she had committed no crime, and most women had a difficult time challenging authorities. The lot of many Toluca women was hard, and especially hard for poor women (and poor men) and widows in general. A Castro and Campillo lithograph on the book jacket makes this point, depicting women on a road to market carrying heavy burdens. But the men in their company are also loaded down, and all are in traditional dress and out and about.Was life really worse for women in Toluca’s countryside? The extended family as household was a sanctuary of sorts, and if women tended to their duties and violated no norms, by and large they managed. Ethnicity, lineage, and legitimacy continued to define the community, and that same community could be inclusive of the disenfranchised as long as there were resources for all. But with a shortage of land and radical political innovations, it may be that poor individuals, and widows in particular, lost all entitlement.This book furnishes important new information about community life in transition in Toluca. It would have benefited greatly, however, from careful copyediting (“being hung nude,” p. 86) and support of assertions such as “Indian men likely felt more impotent than other men” (p. 51), and “The new state . . . became increasingly liberal and less inclined to protect rural women” (p. 108). The appendix fails to list any sources and the index is sorely deficient. That said, Hijos del Pueblo nevertheless contributes significantly to the field of gender studies and Mexican history and will be useful in classrooms and as a research tool.