170 



INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY PUBLICATION NO. 6 



as "in Tzintzuntzan," "in Cerro Tariaqueri," 

 or "in Cerro Yahuaro." A handful of holdings 

 are outside of the immediate neighborhood, in 

 Patambicho, Ocurio, Ichupio, or other places. 

 In Ichupio, 24 male and 16 female landowners 

 have land assessed at $17,000, on which taxes 

 of $250 are paid. In Ojo de Agua, 16 male and 

 5 female landowners have land assessed at 

 $5,000, on which taxes of $68 are paid. There 

 is no indication as to what part of this land is 

 agricultural and what is not; obviously, much 

 is forest and pasture land. Thus, in the region 

 of Tzintzuntzan and its two main "suburbs," 

 total registered land is assessed at $65,000 and 

 taxes of $875 are levied. The tax rate is given 

 as $0.13^ per $100 assessed value. Careless 

 and inaccurate assessments make the total tax 

 figure somewhat higher than the tax rate would 

 indicate. 



The properties listed for Tzintzuntzan itself 

 were checked with several individuals familiar 

 with the local situation. This check disclosed 

 that of the registered landholders, 40 were dead 

 and 6 were unknown. Eighty-nine registrations 

 appeared to be reasonably correct. The 6 un- 

 known holdings pay, of course, no taxes, and the 

 tax collector admits that he hasn't the remotest 

 idea where they are located. As long as anyone 

 appears to pay the taxes on a dead man's prop- 

 erty, there appears to be no means to force him 

 to register it in the new owner's name. Lands are 

 often left in the name of the dead man to avoid 

 payment of revenue stamps to register the new 

 deed. Some of the holdings turned out to be 

 solares, or house plots, improperly registered in 

 this list. Many holdings are listed simply as su 

 capital, sin pormenor ("his capital, without de- 

 tails"). 



It is clear that these data bearing on landown- 

 ership belong more properly in a section on folk- 

 lore, and for information on actual landhold- 

 ings we have used our own census. Actually, 

 to determine land areas properly a complete 

 survey job is necessary, which would involve 

 many months and many thousands of pesos. 



In addition to property owned by individuals, 

 there are three categories of communal or gov- 

 ernment land. The school, which with its land 

 represents an investment of from $50,000 to 

 $100,000, is listed on tax records at $2,000. 

 The Department of Public Education pays $27 

 annually in taxes. 



The Agrarian Community, the ejido, has land 

 evaluated at $31,400. Taxes are paid to the 

 State tax collector in the form of 5 percent of 

 harvests. 



The Indigenous Community is listed as hav- 

 ing lands valued at $ 10,940, including 17 hec- 

 tares of the Cerrito Colorado, the principal clay 

 source of the potters. Taxes in the form of 5 

 percent of all income are supposed to be paid 

 to the State tax collector. Since, apart from the 

 clay mines and a little pasture land, all of this 

 area is in brush or timber, there is no agricul- 

 tural produce. Rights to the maguey from which 

 mezcal is made are sold each year to the highest 

 bidder, usually for about $100. Technically, 

 $5 should go to the State, but since the municipio 

 was founded in 1930 no payment has been made. 



The Indigenous Community appears to be a 

 fragmentary survival of both Spanish and In- 

 dian institutions, the lands owned in common by 

 a free town for the joint exploitation of the citi- 

 zens. Historically, it is related to the modern 

 ejido, and a digression into history will make 

 both institutions somewhat clearer in their rela- 

 tionship to the town. This story has its roots 

 in colonial times, and has been paralleled in 

 hundreds — perhaps even thousands — of other 

 cases in Mexico. 



By royal grant from the king of Spain, Tzin- 

 tzuntzan received communal title to its agricul- 

 tural, pasture, and forested lands. Pasture and 

 forested lands were free for the use of all citi- 

 zens, and no one could claim special rights. 

 Agricultural lands, in practice, came to be pri- 

 vate property, in that continued use of the land 

 made it inalienable. Such land was handed 

 down from generation to generation so that, 

 without legal title, each individual had his own 

 lands, recognized by all other members of the 

 community. All land, however, agricultural and 

 nonagricultural, was in the final analysis held 

 by communal title, vested in the so-called Co- 

 mimidad Indigena, or Indigenous Community. 

 No legal provision was made for the individual 

 to sell his farm lands, even though they had 

 been in his family for generations. In view of 

 the illiteracy and ignorance of the average farm- 

 er, and the desire of unscrupulous large, educat- 

 ed landowners to add to their holdings, the wis- 

 dom of this arrangement is apparent. This sys- 

 tem continued into the 19th century in many 

 parts of Mexico after the War of Independence. 



