Monuments on Trial: Mexican Archaeology and Subsoil Sovereignty

In the aftermath of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, a new constitutional framework (enshrined in Article 27 of the 1917 Constitution) attempted to remake the unequal relations of access to land and resources that had catalyzed the conflict. The article’s radical contents nationalized the country’s subsoil resources, including land, water, minerals, and oil. This paper explores the controversial expansion of Mexico’s subsoil sovereignty to encompass antiquities. Focusing on the watershed 1932 Supreme Court case over the fate of artifacts excavated at the site of Monte Albán in Oaxaca, I trace the efforts of jurists and technocrats who reinterpreted the provisions of Article 27 in order to enforce the state’s claims to an archaeological past.

The case emerged as an administrative dispute between the federal government and the state of Oaxaca over who had the right to manage and display archaeological finds, but it developed into a constitutional crisis that tested the limits of Mexico’s government. Article 27 granted the Mexican state the authority to reshape property rights in the public interest and act as steward of the country’s resources on behalf of the nation. Mexico, however, is not a unitary entity. In its structure as a federal republic, each of the thirty one states (and the capital, Mexico City), has autonomy to govern its internal affairs. The outcome of the case thus hinged upon the question of who held sovereignty over the subsoil and, by extension, the monuments and artifacts found beneath the earth’s surface.