What do you think?
Rate this book
Buried Secrets: Truth and Human Rights in Guatemala
Between the late 1970s and the late-1980s, Guatemala was torn by mass terror and extreme violence in a genocidal campaign against the Maya, which becameknown as "La Violencia." More than 600 massacres occurred, one and a half million people were displaced, and more than 200,000 civilians were murdered, most of them Maya. Buried Secrets brings these chilling statistics to life as it chronicles the journey of Maya survivors seeking truth, justice, and community healing, and demonstrates that the Guatemalan army carried out a systematic and intentional genocide against the Maya. The book is based on exhaustive research, including more than 400 testimonies from massacre survivors, interviews with members of the forensic team, human rights leaders, high-ranking military officers, guerrilla combatants, and government officials. Buried Secrets traces truth-telling and political change from isolated Maya villages to national political events, and provides a unique look into the experiences of Maya survivors as they struggle to rebuild their communities and lives.
313 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2003
9 people are currently reading
540 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
November 26, 2008
Still in the throes of my anthropology [mental] feeding fest, and on top of my recent post on the dilemma of international justice, this post is very timely. I just finished reading Sanford’s book this morning. I’d actually used her Ph.D. dissertation as a source when I wrote my Master’s thesis on postconflict life in Rwanda and Guatemala. It was very cool to meet her at the 2005 AAA’s in DC and to get a copy of her book. Unfortunately, I didn’t have the book before her talk, so I couldn’t get it autographed (I’m an anthro groupie).
Sanford’s book is a must read for a slew of audiences: anthropologist, Latin Americanist, human rights worker, international justice specialist, postconflict specialist, and the genearl public. There may be a few groups I left off, but that’s purely unintentional. Sandord has done what so few anthropologists have done, write an accessible book. I read every word and took my time working through her narrative. In some anthro texts, I glance from paragraph to paragraph, looking for little gems amongst the rough. With hers, I took something from almost every sentence. Kudos to you, Victoria!
As for the content, she’s covering her work in Guatemala at the tail end of the civil war and in the postconflict transition. She’s focused her story from the ground-up, building collections of testimony from Maya who survived La Violencia, the local name given for the 36+ year civil war in Guatemala. Her field techniques should be mandatory reading material for future anthropologists and all NGOs that do field work.
She takes these testimonies to build a strong case against the Guatemalan military and state in its execution of genocide and state-sponsored terror throughout the rural areas of the country. She devotes her last last chapter to extrapolating her data into an analysis of postconflict justice and peace. When discussing amnesty and impunity, she notes that amnesty is simply a retelling of the national narrative during the violence (Sanford 2003:252). In my own words, it’s like the state saying during the violence that “We are right” and afterwards, amnesty is confirming that statement with “We were right.”
Her analysis also focuses on how to talk about violence, trying to avoid the traditional Western legal notion of discrete, time-disconnected events. For example, when talking about the massacre in Acul (in Ixil), she noted how the official human rights ombudsman cut off massacre survivor testimony that sought to describe how the violence began, the massacre itself, and the post-massacre continued violence (cultural, mental, and physical). Sanford (2003:258) writes “Limiting data collection to only the massacre provides no insigh to undersanding La Violencia.”
Speaking of trials, she illustrates the importance of going after low-level “fish” in addition to the intellectual authors of state violence. She refers to lateral (or what I call local) impunity, whereby the state or its army has been removed from some communities, the local military commissioners are often still in place and still continuing their reigns of terror. “While army officials fear they may be tried for genocide, military commissioners now know they can be tried an convicted for murder and that the army will do nothing to stop the convictions” (Sanford 2003: 269-270).
When discussing truth commissions and exchanges of truth for amnesty, in South Africa (Sanford 2003: 259), she explains that such public testimonies often foreground the individual perpetrator but background the state apparatus. We see an individual, not a concrete system of violence. Amnesty precludes state accountability. She paraphrases Spanish prosecutor Baltasar Garzon (who charged Pinochet) who believed “it is only after justice and punishment that forgiveness can be considered” (Sanford 2003:261).
Speaking back to her work, I’d like to have seen more discussion of postconflict life, in regards to vigilante justice (a la Godoy’s work) and when individuals use the justice and reconciliation process to settle old scores unrelated to the violence. These are small things to flesh out this outstanding work that Victoria Sanford has produce.
Sanford’s book is a must read for a slew of audiences: anthropologist, Latin Americanist, human rights worker, international justice specialist, postconflict specialist, and the genearl public. There may be a few groups I left off, but that’s purely unintentional. Sandord has done what so few anthropologists have done, write an accessible book. I read every word and took my time working through her narrative. In some anthro texts, I glance from paragraph to paragraph, looking for little gems amongst the rough. With hers, I took something from almost every sentence. Kudos to you, Victoria!
As for the content, she’s covering her work in Guatemala at the tail end of the civil war and in the postconflict transition. She’s focused her story from the ground-up, building collections of testimony from Maya who survived La Violencia, the local name given for the 36+ year civil war in Guatemala. Her field techniques should be mandatory reading material for future anthropologists and all NGOs that do field work.
She takes these testimonies to build a strong case against the Guatemalan military and state in its execution of genocide and state-sponsored terror throughout the rural areas of the country. She devotes her last last chapter to extrapolating her data into an analysis of postconflict justice and peace. When discussing amnesty and impunity, she notes that amnesty is simply a retelling of the national narrative during the violence (Sanford 2003:252). In my own words, it’s like the state saying during the violence that “We are right” and afterwards, amnesty is confirming that statement with “We were right.”
Her analysis also focuses on how to talk about violence, trying to avoid the traditional Western legal notion of discrete, time-disconnected events. For example, when talking about the massacre in Acul (in Ixil), she noted how the official human rights ombudsman cut off massacre survivor testimony that sought to describe how the violence began, the massacre itself, and the post-massacre continued violence (cultural, mental, and physical). Sanford (2003:258) writes “Limiting data collection to only the massacre provides no insigh to undersanding La Violencia.”
Speaking of trials, she illustrates the importance of going after low-level “fish” in addition to the intellectual authors of state violence. She refers to lateral (or what I call local) impunity, whereby the state or its army has been removed from some communities, the local military commissioners are often still in place and still continuing their reigns of terror. “While army officials fear they may be tried for genocide, military commissioners now know they can be tried an convicted for murder and that the army will do nothing to stop the convictions” (Sanford 2003: 269-270).
When discussing truth commissions and exchanges of truth for amnesty, in South Africa (Sanford 2003: 259), she explains that such public testimonies often foreground the individual perpetrator but background the state apparatus. We see an individual, not a concrete system of violence. Amnesty precludes state accountability. She paraphrases Spanish prosecutor Baltasar Garzon (who charged Pinochet) who believed “it is only after justice and punishment that forgiveness can be considered” (Sanford 2003:261).
Speaking back to her work, I’d like to have seen more discussion of postconflict life, in regards to vigilante justice (a la Godoy’s work) and when individuals use the justice and reconciliation process to settle old scores unrelated to the violence. These are small things to flesh out this outstanding work that Victoria Sanford has produce.
October 9, 2018
In this excellent ethnography, Sanford centralizes the agency of her interlocutors and emphasizes the importance of their testimony in revealing truth and seeking justice after state-sponsored genocide. The theory with which Sanford engages reminds us that the subversion of state narratives and power--the citizenry holding the state accountable versus the state exerting control over its citizenry with unchecked power--is essential to the maintenance of democracy and the rule of law.
July 21, 2025
This is a very extensive look at the massacres in Guatemala- I skipped over some parts because it was like reading a text book. I’m glad this book is available so people will know the real back story of what happened to the Mayans.
November 3, 2013
An expert witness for the CEH in Guatemala, Sanford clarifies the killings of hundreds of thousands of Maya indigenous people from 1978 until the Peace Accords in 1997. Some people still feared for their lives in 2002 when the book was published. Delineates in excruciating terms the massacre at Panzos where Maya indigenous were killed by death squads and buried in a mass grave. She also explains the flight to the mountains after the massacres of the Scorched Earth campaigns of many Maya where they died of starvation or were forced to kill their babies by the rebels. Neither side comes out well in this book; although the traditional Maya were clearly the most persecuted, the death squads of the government (backed by US CIA training and funding) and the rebels both appear to have treated the Maya badly.
August 23, 2008
This is a very detailed account of the anthropological study into La Violencia (the government run, USA backed, genocide) in Guatemala. The book includes testimony and evidence from both sides as well as hard antropological findings. It pieces together a puzzle of often contradicting details that, when assembled, reveal a systematic campaign to violently silence indigenous Mayans and control "the official story." It is not an easy read as it contains horrific descriptions of torture and murder but I find it impossible to put this book down. This is a must read for anybody interested in Rigoberta Menchu, Latin America, Guatemala, genocide, human rights, and forensic anthropology.
October 30, 2022
An excellent ethnography and analysis of the events that took place during before, after, and during the period of La Violencia in Guatemala. It demonstrates the value of survivor testimony when recounting history and above all emphasizes how the act of speaking truth can begin the process of community healing, challenging history imposed by perpetrators and crumbling structures of state terror.
.
.
.
On a side note, Sanford got a bit repetitive as the book progressed and I'm convinced she could have shortened it a bit to avoid this.
.
.
.
On a side note, Sanford got a bit repetitive as the book progressed and I'm convinced she could have shortened it a bit to avoid this.
October 21, 2015
I'm sure this is a fascinating book but it is a very detailed account of genocide and very hard to read. The author does a good job explaining the key ideas throughout her book and summing up the data she found.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews