Whereas scholars of postrevolutionary Mexico have long attended to the ideological significance of pre-Hispanic monuments, this article looks at the actual work involved in reconstructing them. Field reports from state archaeologists for the pyramid at Tajı́n (in the lowlands of northern Veracruz) from the midto late twentieth century reveal a parallel between the fragility of the monument and the precariousness of the local population, whose labor refashioned the pyramid. An ethnographic consideration of San Antonio Ojital, a community once located north of the archaeological site, further suggests that the making of monumentality elicited a regime of perceptibility that conceals the ongoing struggles of local residents. By layering these temporally dispersed episodes in the long recovery of the main pyramid in Tajı́n, I present monumentality as a selective process of reconstruction, which despite privileging wholeness, unity, and containment has only worked on the basis of obscuring social and material fragmentation, destruction, and precariousness. I n March 1929, topographer Agustı́n Garcı́a Vega visited the lowland basin of the Tecolutla River in order to pursue a project commissioned by the Office of Pre-Hispanic Monuments: he was to reconstruct a fragile and junglecovered pyramid located only a few miles from the recently created settlement I would like to thank the reviewers and editors of HAHR for their insightful comments and critical suggestions. I also want to thank Ray Craib, Timothy Haupt, Mark Healey, Sandra Rozental, Adam Smith, Kirsten Weld, Marina Welker, and Trais Pearson for commenting on drafts of this article. Earlier versions of this piece were presented at Harvard’s Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Seminar on Violence and Non-violence in 2015 in Cambridge, MA, at the 2016 Latin American Studies Association conference in New York City, at the 2016 University of Florida Center of Latin American Studies Annual Conference in Gainesville, FL, and at the “Antropologı́a, poder y ruralidades” seminar held at the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México’s Instituto de Investigaciones Antropológicas in 2017. I am grateful for the feedback that I received from all the participants. I am further indebted to the members of the cooperative Lankasipi, to Jesús Trejo, and to Benjamin Blaisot for sharing their experiences and their own photographs with me. I also wish to acknowledge the staffof the National Institute of Anthropology and History for allowing me to conduct ethnographic research at the site, consult their archives, and use their historical images. Research for this project was made possible by a Dissertation Fieldwork Grant from the Wenner-Gren Foundation. Hispanic American Historical Review 98:1 doi 10.1215/00182168-4294456 2018 by Duke University Press Downloaded from https://read.dukeupress.edu/hahr/article-pdf/98/1/43/525587/43landa.pdf by guest on 20 July 2019 of Tajı́n.1 Garcı́a Vega’s presence in the lowlands of Veracruz was part of a larger nationalist effort to reconstruct the past or, in the words of President Plutarco Elı́as Calles (1924–1928), to “uproot prejudices and form the new national soul.”2 What Garcı́a Vega found upon arrival, however, differed greatly from the complete, pristine, and deserted spaces suggested in the written accounts and images of well-known geographers, explorers, and scholars from the previous century.3 Judging by the photographs that Garcı́a Vega took, the recessed niches of the structure had collapsed, the balustrades on each side of the stairway were uneven or incomplete, and the pyramid’s outward-projecting 1. Agustı́n Garcı́a Vega to Ignacio Marquina, Mexico City, 22 June 1934, Archivo Técnico del Instituto Nacional de Antropologı́a e Historia, Mexico City (hereafter cited as ATINAH), vol. 1 (1924–35), tomo 125, Tajı́n, Estado de Veracruz. On the history of the settlement of Tajı́n, see Kelly and Palerm, Tajı́n Totonac, 56. On the violent land disentailment process that affected this region in the late nineteenth century, see Kourı́, Pueblo Divided. It must be noted that experts commissioned by the Office of Pre-Hispanic Monuments were not the only ones visiting Tajı́n. Geologists too visited the area hoping to identify rock formations potentially rich in oil. Oil exploration and drilling during the first halfof the twentieth century in fact contributed to the active land market that characterized the region during this period. See Brizuela, Historia agraria. On the expansion ofthe southern frontier of the oil-producing district in northern Veracruz, the subsequent nationalization of the oil industry, and its eventual demise, see also Olvera, “Rise and Fall”; Salas Landa, “Crude Residues.” 2. Plutarco Elı́as Calles, quoted in Meyer, Segovia, and Lajous, Historia, 178. 3. The role that the nineteenth century played in valorizing this monument and therefore in advancing its visual reconstruction should not be underestimated. The photographs ofthe pyramid taken in 1890 during the Comisión Cientı́fica Exploradora to Cempoala led by Francisco del Paso y Troncoso and the lithographic representation of the pyramid from Antonio Garcı́a Cubas, which was attached to his Carta general de la República Mexicana of 1858, illustrate this point. In both instances, each of the structure’s seven levels is symmetrically placed, its characteristic niches are perfectly aligned, and an imposing main stairway exhibits all its constitutive blocks. The pyramid, in short, is given solidity and integrity that it certainly lacked in material terms but that nevertheless was attributed to it in order to communicate a sense of stability, historical precedent, and grandeur. On the Comisión Cientı́fica Exploradora, see Galindo y Villa, Las ruinas; Casanova, “La fotografı́a”; Torre Villar, Ocupaciones. On the life and work of Garcı́a Cubas, see Craib, Cartographic Mexico, 32–33; Carrera, Traveling, 17–18, 156. Earlier accounts and images of the pyramid are found in Diego Ruı́z’s report of his discovery of the monument in 1785: Diego Ruı́z, “Cabo de la ronda del tabaco,” Gaceta de México (Mexico City), 12 July 1785, pp. 349–51. See also Marquez, Due antichi monumenti; Humboldt, Essai politique; Nebel, Voyage pittoresque. For an analysis of the role of travelers in the construction of a national patrimony in Mexico, see Pani, “Los viajeros decimonónicos”; Keen, Aztec Image, is also relevant. 44 HAHR / February / Salas Landa Downloaded from https://read.dukeupress.edu/hahr/article-pdf/98/1/43/525587/43landa.pdf by guest on 20 July 2019 cornices were severely damaged (figure 1).4 “Luckily,” Garcı́a Vega observed, “the governments of the last couple of years, conscious of their duty, have started to look after our ancient monuments, and little by little we will attend and care for each of our great pre-Hispanic oeuvres.”5 At the most fundamental level, attending and caring for an ancient and crumbling monument required, in Garcı́a Vega’s view, “recuperating the pyramid’s original look.”6 This meant returning the monument to what Garcı́a Figure 1. The pyramid’s condition before restoration work. Agustı́n Garcı́a Vega to Ignacio Marquina, Mexico City, 22 June 1934, Archivo Técnico del Instituto Nacional de Antropologı́a e Historia, Mexico City, vol. 1, tomo 125, Tajı́n, Estado de Veracruz. SECRETARIA DE CULTURA.-INAH.-MEX. Reproduction authorized by the Instituto Nacional de Antropologı́a e

中文翻译：

---

（看不见的）废墟：革命后墨西哥的纪念性重建政治

墨西哥革命后的学者长期以来一直关注西班牙裔前古迹的思想意义，但本文着眼于重建古迹的实际工作。国家考古学家在20世纪中叶至后期在Tajın（位于韦拉克鲁斯州北部低地）的金字塔上进行的实地报道显示，纪念碑的脆弱性与当地居民the可危之间的相似之处，他们的劳动使金字塔重塑。从人种学角度考虑，圣安东尼奥·奥吉塔尔（San Antonio Ojital）是一个曾经位于考古遗址以北的社区，这进一步表明，纪念性建筑的建立引发了一种可感知的制度，掩盖了当地居民正在进行的斗争。通过在Tajın的主要金字塔的长期恢复中分层这些时间分散的事件，我将纪念性作为选择性的重建过程，尽管它使整体性，统一性和包容性处于劣势，但它只能在掩盖社会和物质分裂，破坏和pre可危的基础上发挥作用。1929年3月，地形学家AgustınGarcıaVega参观了Tecolutla河的低地盆地，以推行由西班牙前古迹遗址办公室委托的项目：他将重建一座脆弱且被丛林覆盖的金字塔，距离最近的金字塔只有几英里达成协议，我要感谢HAHR的审稿人和编辑的有见地的评论和关键建议。我还要感谢Ray Craib，Timothy Haupt，Mark Healey，Sandra Rozental，Adam Smith，Kirsten Weld，Marina Welker和Trais Pearson对本文草案的评论。该作品的早期版本在2015年在马萨诸塞州剑桥举行的哈佛大学安德鲁·W·梅隆基金会关于暴力与非暴力的研讨会上进行了介绍，在纽约市2016年拉丁美洲研究协会会议上，在2016年佛罗里达大学拉丁中心举行在佛罗里达州盖恩斯维尔举行的美国研究年度会议，以及在2017年墨西哥国立自治大学研究机构举办的“Antropologıa，poder y Ruralidades”研讨会上。我感谢所有参与者的反馈。我还要感谢Lankasipi合作社的成员，JesúsTrejo和Benjamin Blaisot与我分享他们的经验和自己的照片。我还要感谢美国国家人类学和历史研究所的工作人员，让我在现场进行人种学研究，查阅他们的档案并使用他们的历史图像。Wenner-Gren基金会的论文野外工作资助使该项目的研究成为可能。杜克大学出版社（Duke University Press）2018年《西班牙裔美国人历史评论》 98：1 doi 10.1215 / 00182168-4294456 2018年由来宾从https://read.dukeupress.edu/hahr/article-pdf/98/1/43/525587/43landa.pdf下载Tajın.1GarcıaVega于2019年7月20日在韦拉克鲁斯（Veracruz）的低地上的存在是重建民族主义的更大努力的一部分，或者用总统普卢塔尔科·埃利埃斯·卡利斯（PlutarcoElıasCalles，1924-1928年）的话来说，是“根除偏见并形成新的民族灵魂。” 2加西亚·维加抵达后发现了什么，与上个世纪著名地理学家，探险家和学者的书面记录和图像中建议的完整，原始和空旷的空间有很大不同。3从加西亚·维加（GarcıaVega）拍摄的照片来看，结构的凹ni具有倒塌，楼梯两侧的栏杆不均匀或不完整，金字塔向外凸出。1.阿古斯丁·加西亚·维加（AgustınGarcıaVega）到墨西哥城伊格纳西奥·马奎纳（Ignacio Marquina），1934年6月22日，墨西哥国立档案馆以下简称为ATINAH），第一卷 1（1924–35），塔莫125号，塔金，韦拉克鲁斯州。关于泰姬陵定居的历史，请参见凯利和巴勒姆，泰姬陵托托纳克，56岁。关于在19世纪后期影响该地区的暴力土地剥夺过程，请参见《普韦布洛分居》的库尔琳。必须指出的是，西班牙前古迹办公室委托的专家并不是唯一访问塔吉恩的人。地质学家也访问了该地区，希望能发现可能富含石油的岩层。实际上，二十世纪上半叶的石油勘探和钻探为这一时期该地区的活跃土地市场做出了贡献。参见Brizuela，黑斑病。关于韦拉克鲁斯州北部产油区南部边界的扩张，随后的石油工业国有化及其最终灭亡，另见奥尔维拉的《兴衰》；萨拉斯·兰达（Salas Landa），“粗残渣”。2. PlutarcoElıasCalles，引用于塞戈维亚的迈耶（Meyer）和历史悠久的拉胡斯（Lajous），178。3。不应低估19世纪在对这座纪念碑进行增值并因此推进其视觉重建方面所发挥的作用。1890年在弗朗西斯科·帕索·特隆科索（Francisco del Paso y Troncoso）率领的ComisiónCientıficaExploradora到Cempoala期间拍摄的金字塔照片，以及安东尼奥·加西亚·古巴（AntonioGarcıaCubas）的金字塔的石版画插图，该照片附加到他1858年的墨西哥宪章上。在这两种情况下，结构的七个层次均对称放置，其特色壁ni被完美对齐，而气势宏伟的主楼梯则展现出其所有构成要素。简而言之，金字塔具有坚固性和完整性，虽然在物质上确实缺乏它，但是为了传达一种稳定感，却将其归功于它，历史的先例和宏伟。在ComisiónCientıficaExploradora上，欣赏Las Ruinas的Galindo y Villa；卡萨诺瓦，“ La fotografı́a”；托雷·比利亚（Torre Villar）关于加西亚古巴的生活和工作，参见克雷布（Craib），《墨西哥制图》，32-33页；卡雷拉（Carrera），旅行，17–18，156。在迭戈·鲁伊斯（DiegoRuız）于1785年发现古迹的报告中发现了金字塔的早期图像：迭戈·鲁伊斯（Ciego de la ronda del tabaco），加西塔·德·墨西哥（墨西哥城），1785年7月12日，第349–51页。另见马克斯（Marquez），《杜安蒂奇纪念碑》；洪堡，埃塞政治；Nebel，航程姿态。有关旅行者在墨西哥建立国家遗产中的作用的分析，请参阅Pani，“ Los viajerosdecimonónicos”；阿兹台克人形象的基恩也很重要。44 HAHR / 2月/ Salas Landa从https：//read.dukeupress下载。edu / hahr / article-pdf / 98/1/43/525587 / 43landa.pdf在2019年7月20日，访客的檐口受到严重损坏（图1）。4“幸运的是，”加西亚·维加观察到，“最后一对政府多年以来，意识到他们的职责，他们已经开始照顾我们的古迹，并且我们将逐步参加并照顾我们在西班牙前的所有伟大活动。” 5从最根本的角度来说，参加和照顾古迹加西亚·维加（GarcıaVega）认为，需要倒塌的古迹“重新恢复金字塔的原始外观。” 6这意味着将古迹恢复到加西亚图1的状态。恢复工作之前金字塔的状况。阿古斯丁·加西亚·维加（AgustınGarcıaVega）到墨西哥城伊格纳西奥·马奎那（Ignacio Marquina），1934年6月22日，墨西哥国立历史档案馆，墨西哥城，第一卷。1，tomo 125，Tajı́n，Estado de Veracruz。秘书处文化。-INAH.-MEX。全国人类学研究所授权的复制品