THE TAJIN TOTONAC PART 1 KELLY AND PALERM 



37 



Legally, however, it did not change preexisting 

 forms of property, and the Crown stipulated that 

 no property, either private or communal, was to be 

 taken from the Indians. 66 It is doubtful that the 

 royal wish was followed in the majority of cases. 

 Nevertheless, it is necessary to recall that private 

 and communal property of indigenous groups 

 has existed in Mexico until modern times. 



As the encomiendas disappeared, in the course 

 of the eighteenth century, they were transformed 

 into latifundios, or great rural properties in the 

 hands of a single family. These became confused 

 with the hacienda, which latter developed strongly 

 in Totonacapan toward the end of the sixteenth 

 century and the beginning of the seventeenth. 



HACIENDAS 



Although, in time, the encomienda and the ha- 

 cienda became confused, at the start, there were 

 radical differences between the two institutions. 

 In general, these lay in ( 1) form of ownership, (2) 

 labor employed, and (3) type of production. 



With respect to the first, ownership of the 

 encomienda was insecure, whereas that of the ha- 

 cienda was definitive; that is to say, the latter 

 might be bequeathed, transferred, or sold, with- 

 out restriction. 



The second difference also was fundamental. 

 Whereas the encomendero had forced native labor 

 at his disposition, the hacendado was obliged to 

 hire help — although, upon occasion, the Indians 

 might give him manual labor by means of a re- 

 partimiento. The hacienda gave rise to a new 

 social stratum: the peon, composed in part of 

 Indians and in part of imported Negro workmen. 



The third distinction lay in the fact that the 

 encomienda tended, as a rule, to preserve ancient 

 crops and ancient methods of cultivation, whereas, 

 under the hacienda, a different type of economic 

 activity generally was developed — in Totonacapan, 

 particularly stock raising and sugarcane pro- 

 duction. 



Late sixteenth-century records in the Archivo 

 General de la Nation mention numerous authoriza- 

 tions for Spanish colonists to establish ranches 

 (estancias) in Totonacapan. Undoubtedly, the 



lands were indigenous property, either abandoned 

 by the occupants or taken from them (AGN, No. 

 4). At the time of the Discovery the great To- 

 tonac center of "Cempoala" is credited by one 

 source with between 20,000 and 30,000 vecinos 

 (heads of families) (Las Casas, p. 129) ; by an- 

 other (Aguilar, p. 39), with "more than twenty 

 thousand houses." But by the end of the sixteenth 

 century, it was reduced to 12 taxable individuals 

 (Epistolario 14:82), and a few years later, to 8 

 heads of families (indios casados) (Mota y Esco- 

 bar, p. 218). The greater part of its lands were 

 converted into cattle ranches (Mota y Escobar, p. 

 218), and stock raising became of considerable 

 importance in Totonacapan. 07 



Haciendas dedicated to sugarcane and its elabo- 

 ration also flourished in Totonacapan, contribut- 

 ing to the reduction in numbers and to the dis- 

 persal of the native population, 68 and at the same 

 time stimulating the introduction of Negro slaves. 

 This development applied particularly to southern 

 Totonacapan, and there is no indication that in 

 the northern part of the province the sugar mill 

 and the use of Negro slaves were either general 

 or significant. 69 



08 Land repartimientos were to be made ". . . sin agravio para 

 los indios, sin perjuicio de tercero . . ." (Ots Capdequf, p. 51). 



•"Muiioz Camargo (pp. 261-262) and Torquemada (1:610) 

 describe the situation in almost the same words. According to 

 Torquemada : "Con el crecimiento de los Espafioles, han Ido 

 creciendo tambien las Estancias ; porque como se fueron poblando 

 los Lugares maritimos de Panuco, y Nauhtla, que son los Llanos 

 de Almeria, asl fueron poblando por todas aquellas Costas muchas 

 Estancias, hasta llegar a las de Putinco, y Micantla, Estancias de 

 la Vera-Cruz, y otras Tierras calientes . . . que es una cosa sin 

 numero, e" increplble los Ganados, que por alii se han criado, y 

 crian, que si no se ve\ casi no se cree. Estas Tierras se fueron 

 poblando, en tiempo de este Virrei Don Antonio de Mendoga." 



Mota y Escobar (pp. 220—221) lists 18 estancias of horses and 

 cattle, in the area between Misantla and Tecolutla ; and, in the 

 general vicinity of Papantla, 10 (p. 235), most of the stock being 

 horses and mules. 



"8 Diaz del Castillo (3 : 149-150) attributes the destruction 

 of "Cempoala" to cane and the sugar mill : . . . aun trajo 

 Rodrigo de Albornoz licencia de Su Majestad para hacer un 

 ingenio de azticar en un pueblo que se dice Compoal, el cual 

 pueblo en pocos afios destruy6." 



69 Although, in Zacathin, the rulings of Spanish authorities 

 (AGN, Nos. 14, 19, 20) concerning relationships between Indians 

 and Negroes suggest that the latter element must have been 

 sizable. Villasefior (1:299) mentions mulatos in Zaeatldn In 

 the mideighteenth century. 



We have found no mention of Negroes in the Papantla area. 

 In fact, Papantla does not even appear in the index of a recent 

 "ethnohistorical" work (Aguirre Beltran), devoted to the Negro 

 in Mexico. 



However, in the sixteenth century, mulatos are reported in 

 the vicinity of Misantla (Kelaci6n de Misantla), and an eight- 

 eenth-century document (AGN, No. 7) likewise indicates a Negro 

 element in that zone. In southern Totonacapan, during the early 

 seventeenth century, there was a Negro uprising (Veracruz, 

 Resefia geograflca, p. 7). 



