114 



INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY — PUBLICATION NO. 13 



growth of the monte, so that the plot may be avail- 

 able the sooner for a new clearing. However, what 

 really is desired is the rapid growth of woody 

 plants, not of annual weeds. Aside from the 

 necessity of having the monte sufficiently heavy to 

 permit a good burn, it seems likely that in Taj in, 

 as in Yucatan, "tree growth functions primarily 

 in choking out annual weeds" (Emerson, p. 10). 



The preoccupation with weeds is such that one 

 very good informant declared that those who enter 

 a field to plant rinse their feet, to avoid carrying 

 unwanted seeds into the milpa. But another, un- 

 acquainted with this precaution, was not im- 

 pressed, remarking loftily that the seeds stick to 

 the clothing, not to the bare feet. Probably for 

 this reason, women who enter a milpa hoist their 

 skirts about their knees. 



Apart from annual weeds, the Totonac struggle 

 with the monte which, despite chopping and burn- 

 ing, sprouts anew with astonishing vigor. New 

 shoots are slashed with the machete to curb their 

 growth, but monte plants are not removed by root. 



The incursion of grassland is not a very serious 

 problem locally, and the Totonac are far more con- 

 cerned with the weeds listed above than they are 

 with grass, although Morley (p. 153) declares the 

 latter to be "the undefeatable enemy of milpa 

 agriculture." As might be expected, several 

 grasses are troublesome in the maize field — for 

 example, zacate ftno, zacate de elote, and zacate 

 salado (Nos. 352, 353, 363). However, it is said 

 that they do not make serious inroads in a milpa 

 unless the monte is removed by root. In that case, 

 they are able to establish themselves and may 

 form a grass covering so thick that other plants 

 have difficulty in penetrating the sod. Accord- 

 ingly, it is "many years" before the woody monte 

 is restored and before the forest is sufficiently large 

 to warrant clearing for a new maize field. 



As a matter of fact, this observation concerning 

 the relationship between grass intrusion and weed- 

 ing by root — made by several Totonac, although 

 not all concurred — may be both valid and of con- 

 siderable interest. At least, the data presented 

 by Morley suggest that the same situation may 

 hold in Yucatan. There, during 8 years, an ex- 

 perimental milpa was planted at Chichen Itza : 



For the first four years the annual yield of corn rapidly 

 decreased under the modern method of weeding, that is 

 cutting rather than pulling up the weeds by their roots. 



The fifth year the experimental milpa was weeded the 

 ancient way, by completely pulling up the weeds, removing 

 even their roots. Under this more thorough method of 

 weeding, the yield slightly exceeded even the first year's 

 crop, but lost more than half the next year (the sixth 

 year). It gained again in the seventh year . . . But 

 grass, the undefeatable enemy of milpa agriculture, even- 

 tually crowded out the bush ... in the closing three 

 or four years [that is, from the 5th or 6th, through the 8th] 

 . . . grass everywhere invaded this . . . tract of land 

 so that it became more and more covered with a thick 

 grassy mat, through which even weeds, to say nothing 

 of cornstalks, could not push their way (Morley, pp. 152- 

 153). 



In short, the incursion of grass more or less coin- 

 cided with the return to the "ancient" system of 

 uprooting weeds. 



Specialists are not entirely agreed concerning 

 the role played by grass in modern Mayan agri- 

 culture in Yucatan : 



Steggerda (p. 92) observes that "sod does develop after 

 continued use of a field" ; but his report was published 

 before the experimental planting in Chichen Itza had 

 terminated. When he wrote, the Yucatdn milpa still 

 presented no concrete evidence (p. 121). Morley's account 

 presumably brings the sequel to a close. 



However, Kempton (p. 3) states flatly that at "none of 

 the places visited either in Yucatan or Campeche does 

 grass seem to be a factor in corn production nor in the 

 reestablishment of the bush"; and he concludes (p. 7) 

 that there "is no evidence that extensive areas of grass 

 land with periodic burning suppress the forest in Yucatan." 



Emerson (p. 4) agrees that even "in very recently 

 abandoned milpas little grass is seen, except in the extreme 

 northern and western parts of the area [of Yucat3.nl 

 visited. Here the many large henequen haciendas, in 

 which the brush has been kept cut for ten to fifteen years, 

 apparently return to bush less rapidly when abandoned 

 and more grass is seen." 



These observations apply specifically to modern 

 Mayan agriculture, in the course of which weeds 

 are not uprooted but are cut with the machete. 

 The crucial point here seems to be whether Morley 

 is justified in stating that the "ancient" way of 

 weeding was to extract the weeds by the root. He 

 cites no authority; but, if he is correct, it seems 

 possible that the old system of Mayan agriculture 

 opened the way to grassland and thus carried 

 within it the seed of self-destruction. 



PESTS AND OTHER CROP HAZARDS 



Weed control is not the only problem which be- 

 sets the Totonac farmer ; birds and other animal 

 pests also cause their share of worries. Some 



