No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 April 2010
The subject of this article is Indian society in the Pampas and neighbouring territories in Argentina. I will focus on the deep changes that Indian societies experienced in their economy and socio-political structure during the period that followed Hispanic settlement on the Río de la Plata shores at the end of the sixteenth century. The original hunter-gatherer bands had transformed into true chiefdoms by the middle of the nineteenth century. How, when, and why they changed are the questions that I, and other scholars in Argentina, have tried to answer.
1 Anthropologists use chiefdoms to refer to an specific form of non-state polity, but scholars do not agree on the basic traits of such political organization. I agree with the minimal definition of Robert Carneiro: ‘A chiefdom is an autonomous political unit comprising a number ofvillages or communities under the permanent control of a paramount chief’. And he adds that this definition ‘[…] is structural. It focuses on territorial and political forms. It specifies that in a chiefdom a number of villages, forming a lower level of organization, have been united in a higher level, governed by a superior chief. Carneiro, Robert, ‘The Chiefdom: Precursor of the State’ in: Jones, C. D., Kautz, Robert R. eds, The Transition to Statehood in the New World (Cambridge 1981) 45Google Scholar. It is not an easy task to define chiefdoms, to a great extent because their multiplicity and variation, and more recent discussion have just focused on the variability of chiefdoms: Earle, Timothy K., ‘Chiefdoms in Archaeological and Ethnohistorical Perspective’, Annual Review of Anthropology 16 (1987) 279–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Earle, ‘The Evolution of Chiefdoms’ in: idem ed., Chiefdoms: Power, Economy, and Ideology (Cambridge 1991) 1-15.
2 The other important and complex process of cultural change developed in the pampas, was that which both historians and anthropologists have called ‘Araucanization’ but I will not deal with it in this article. See Mandrini, Raúl and Ortelli, Sara, ‘Repensando los viejos problemas: Observaciones sobre la araucanización de las pampas’, RUNA: Archive para las Ciencias del Hombre 22 (1995) 135–150Google Scholar; and Ortelli, Sara, ‘La “araucanizacion” las pampas: Realidad histórica o constructión de los etnólogos?’, Anuario del IEHS 11 (1996) 203–225Google Scholar.
3 The social and cultural changes initiated by the European arrivals in America were doubdess varied and complex, and they depend on different facts and conditions. I agree with Samuel M. Wilson andj. Daniel Rogers in that‘[…] the cultural change undergone by Native American peoples was neither one-sided nor solely governed by Europeans intentions and strategies […] the attitudes and actions of Native Americans played a large part in determining the impact of contact’. Moreover, societies and cultures are never static. The contact period was a time of relatively rapid transformations, an d - as it happened in the pampas - the economic, social and political Indian environment was deeply altered by the interactions with Euro-Americans. But the Indian societies actively participated in the creation of this new environment and in defining the character of the relationships between both societies. See Wilson, Samuel M., Rogers, J. Daniel eds, Ethnohistory and Archaeology: Approaches to Postcontact Change in the Americas (New York 1993) 3–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Some years ago, I held this view in ‘Frontera y relaciones fronterizas en la historiografia argentino-chilena: A propósito de un reciente libro de Sergio Villalobos’, Boletin del Institute de Historia Argentina y Americana ‘Dr. Emilio Ravignani’ 3/3a serie (1991) 139–145Google Scholar.
4 Mandrini, Raúl J., ‘Indios y fronteras en el area pampaeana (siglos XVI-XIX): Balance y perspectivas’, Anuario del IEHS 7 (1992) 59–73Google Scholar.
5 A classical analysis on the Kulturkreise, from the view of the American Historical Parti-cularism, is Lowie, Robert H., The History ofEthnological Theory (New York 1938) 177–195Google Scholar; for a more critical view, see Harris, Marvin, The Rise of Anthropological Theory: A History Theories of Culture (New York 1968) 382–392Google Scholar. On the influence of this school in Argentina: Boschin, María T. and Llamazares, Ana, ‘La Escuela Histórico-Cultural como factor retarda-tario del desarrollo científico de la arqueología argentina’, Etnía 32 (1984) 101–156Google Scholar.
6 Orquera, Luis A., ‘Advances in die Archaeology of the Pampa and Patagonia’, Journal of World Prehistory 1/4 (1987) 333–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mazzanti, Diana Leonis, ‘El periodo tardio en la arqueologia bonaerense’ in: Mandrini, Raul, Reguera, Andrea eds, Huellas en la tierra: Indios, agricultores y hacendados en la pampa bonaerense (Tandil 1993) 31–44Google Scholar.
7 The word toldería (literally, a group of toldos) - derived from this characteristic kind of housing — is used to designate the essential social and economic unit in the Indian world. Each broad family occupied a toldo. Who lived in a tolderia constituted a lineage, a group of families linked by kinship. See Mandrini, Raúl J., ‘Sólo de caza y robos vivían los indios? La organizatión económica de los cacicatos pampeanos del siglo XIX’, Siglo XIX: Revista de Historia 2/15 (Mexico 1994) 11Google Scholar.
8 We can mention some examples of these broad exchanges. In 1582 Garay found knitwear from Chile among Indians setded on the Atlantic coast: Garay, Juan de, ‘Carta al Consejo de Indias […]’ in: Guiñazú, E. Ruíz, Garay: Fundador de Buenos Aires (Buenos Aires 1915) 87–88Google Scholar. Ovalle refers to cebil (hallucinogen from the Argentine Northwest or from Chaco) consumption among the Pampean Indians: Gollán, José A. Pérez and Gordillo, Inés, ‘Religión y alucinógenos en el antiguo Noroeste argentino’, Ciencia Hoy 4/22 (Buenos Aires 1993) 56Google Scholar. Circulation of shells or valves for ornamental or ceremonial use would be another example: Soler, Benigno J. Martinez, ‘Conchyliologia Edinologica: El uso ornamental y ceremonial de algunas especies de moluscos en territorio argentino, en relación con los desplazamientos étnicos y el comercio indígena prehispánico’, RUNA: Archivopara las Ciencias delHombre 9 (1958–1959) 267–322Google Scholar.
9 Solis, Leonardo León, Maloqueros y conchavadores en Araucanía y las Pampas, 1700-1800 (Temuco 1991) 22–24Google Scholar.
10 This view is well represented by die works of Salvador Canals Frau. See, for example, Poblaciones indigenas de la Argentina: Su origen-su pasado-su presente (Buenos Aires 1973 177–179 and 186Google Scholar
11 Palermo, Miguel A., ‘Reflexiones sobre el llamado “complejo ecuestre” en la Argentina’, RUNA: Archivo para las Ciencias del Hombre 16 (Buenos Aires 1986) 157–178Google Scholar.
12 Palermo, Miguel A., ‘La innovación agropecuaria entre los indígenas pampeano-patagóni-cos: Génesis y procesos’, Anuario del IEHS 3 (1988) 43–90Google Scholar; and Palermo, , ‘El revés de la trama: Apuntes sobre el papel económico de la mujer en las sociedades indígenas tradicio-nales del sur argentino’, Memoria americana 3 (Buenos Aires 1994) 63–90Google Scholar.
13 A general syndiesis of colonial policy of die Spanish Bourbon and his impact in America, in Brading, D. A., ‘Bourbon Spain and Its American Empire’ in: Bethell, Leslie ed., The Cambridge History of Latin America I: Colonial Latin America (Cambridge, London etc. 1984) 389–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Also, David J. Weber, ‘Bourbons and Bárbaros: Center and Periphery in the Reshaping of Spanish Indian Policy’ (paper presented at the Conference on Colonial Centers and Colonial Peripheries 1997). For the Río de la Plata region: Chiara-monte, José C., ‘La etapa ilustrada, 1750-1806’ in: Assadourian, Carlos S., Beato, Guillermo and Chiaramonte, José C., Argentina: De la conquista a la independencia (Buenos Aires 1972) 279–366Google Scholar.
14 Tapson, Alfred J., ‘Indian Warfare on the Pampa during the Colonial Period’, Hispanic American Historical Review 42/1 (1962) 1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Solis, Leonardo León, ‘Las invasiones indige-nas contra las localidades fronterizas de Buenos Aires, Cuyo y Chile, 1700-1800’, Boletin Americanista 36 (Barcelona 1987) 75–104Google Scholar.
15 Mandrini, Raúl J., ‘Desarrollo de un a sociedad indigena pastoril en el área interserrana bonaerense’, Anuario del IEHS 2 (1987) 86–88Google Scholar; ‘Procesos de especialización regional en la economia indígena pampeana (siglos XVIII-XIX): El caso del suroeste bonaerense’, Boletín Americanista 41 (Barcelona 1991) 121–123Google Scholar; ‘Las transformaciones de la economia indígena bonaerense (ca. 1600-1820)’ in: Mandrini, , Reguera, eds, Huellas en la tierra, 51–54Google Scholar.
16 On this route, Viedma, Francisco de, Memoria dirigida al Sr. Marquez de Loreto, Virey y Capitan General de las Provincias del Rio de la Plata, sobre los obstdculos que han encontrado y las ventajas que prometen los establecimientos proyectados en la Costa Patagonica (Buenos-Aires 1836) 19–20Google Scholar. On the Negro River route, Villarino, Basilio, Diario del Piloto de la Real Armada […], del reconocimiento que hizo del Rio Negro, en la costa oriental de Patagonia, el año de 1782 (Buenos-Aires 1837) 31–32, 33-37, 39-40Google Scholar. Active exchanges with Southern tehuelches, which in summer arrived from their far lands, also developed along this river, especially in Choele Choel. See Viedma, Antonio de, Diario de un viage á la Costa de Patagonia, para reconocer los puntos en donde establecer poblaciones; […] con una Description de la los terrenos (Buenos-Aires 1837) 71Google Scholar.
17 Sergio Villalobos, R., Los pehuenches en la vida Fronteriza (Santiago de Chile 1989)Google Scholar; Varela, Gladys and Biset, Ana María, ‘Entre guerras, alianzas, arreos y caravanas: Los indios de Neuquén en la etapa colonial’ in: Bandieri, Susana et al., Historia de Neuquén (Buenos Aires 1993) 65–106Google Scholar.
18 Tapera Moreira, by Curacó river, Province of La Pampa, seems to have been one of these sites, according to archaeological materials recovered therefrom: Berón, Mónica and Migale, Laura, ‘Control de recursos y movilidad en el sur pampeano: El sitio Tapera Moreira - provincia de La Pampa’, Boletin del Centra 2 (1991) 40–50Google Scholar.
19 Villalobos, R., Los pehuenches en la vida Fronteriza, 74–75 and 126Google Scholar; Solis, Leonardo León, Maloqueros y conchavadores, 110–112, 113-114Google Scholar.
20 On the abundance of animals in this region, see Labrador, José Sánchez, Los indiospampas, pueches y patagones […] Monografia inédita, prologada y anotada par G. Furlong Cardiff SJ (Buenos Aires 1936) 28–29Google Scholar. On the origins of cattle sending to Chile, Villarino, Basilio, Diario del Piloto de la Real Armada, 33Google Scholar, 35, 39, 105-106, 116-117. Also, Cruz, Luis de la, Viaje a su costa, del Alcalde provincial del muy Ilustre Cabildo de la Conception de Chile […] (Buenos Aires 1835) 99–100Google Scholar.
21 Mandrini, , ‘Desarrollo de una sociedad indigena’, 72–80Google Scholar.
22 Mandrini, , ‘Procesos de especialización regional’, 118–119Google Scholar; ‘Las transformaciones de la economía indígena’, 62. Mazzanti, Diana L., ‘Control del ganado caballar a mediados del siglo XVIII en el territorio indio del sector oriental de las serranías de Tandilia’ in: Mandrini, , Reguera, eds, Huellas en la tierra, 75–89Google Scholar.
23 Mandrini, Raúl J., ‘Guerra y paz en la frontera bonaerense durante el siglo XVIII’, Cientia Hoy 23 (1993) 35Google Scholar; and Mandrini, , ‘Las fronteras y la sociedad indigena en el ámbito pampeano’, Anuario del IEHS 12 (1997) 23–34Google Scholar.
24 Garavaglia, Juan C., ‘Economic Growth and Regional Differentiation: The River Plate Region at the End of the Eighteenth Century’, Hispanic American Historical Review 65/1 (1985) 51–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Garavaglia, Juan C. and Gelman, Jorge, ‘Rural History of the Rio de la Plata, 1600-1850: Results of the Historiographical Renaissance’, Latin America Research Review 30/3 (1995) 75–105Google Scholar.
25 Mandrini, , ‘Desarrollo de una sociedad indigena’, 93–97Google Scholar; Mandrini, , ‘Sobre el suttee entre los indígenas de las llanuras argentinas: Nuevos datos e interpretaciones sobre su origen y práctica’, Anales de Antropologia 31 (1994) 270–273Google Scholar; Ortelli, , ‘La “araucanizacion” de las pampas’, 208–212Google Scholar.
26 We have excellent descriptions of these parlamentos. See Garcia, Pedro A., Diario de la expedición de 1822 á los campos del Sud de Buenos-Aires, desde Moron hasta la Sierra de la Ventana; al mando del coronel […] (Buenos-Aires 1836) 79–82Google Scholar; and Yates, William, Jose Miguel Carrera: 1820-1821 (Buenos Aires 1941) 82–83Google Scholar.
27 Falkner, Thomas, A description of Patagonia, and the Adjoining Parts of South America (Hereford 1774) 103 and 121Google Scholar.
28 Labrador, , Los indios Pampas, 35–37, 72-73Google Scholar
29 Lorenzo, a Pampean chief in southern Buenos Aires, also could gather, according to Pablo Zizur, a great number of warriors: Vignati, Milcíades ed., ‘Diario de Zizur, 1781’, Revista del Archive General de la Nación 3/3 (1973) 81–96Google Scholar.
30 Mandrini, , ‘Sobre el suttee entre los indígenas’, 261–267Google Scholar; González, Alberto R., ‘Las exequias de Painé Guor: El suttee entre los araucanos de la llanura’, Relaciones de la Sotiedad Argentina de Antropologia 13 (1979) 137–161Google Scholar.
31 Ratto, Silvia, ‘El “negocio pacífico de los indios”: La frontera bonaerense durante el gobierno de Rosas’, Siglo XIX: Revista de Historia 2/15 (1994) 25–47Google Scholar.
32 Walther, Juan Carlos, La conquista del desierto (Buenos Aires 1964) 369–400Google Scholar.
33 Mandrini, Raúl J., ‘La sociedad indigena de las pampas en el siglo XIX’ in: Lischetti, Mirtha, comp., Antropología (Buenos Aires 1985) 205–230Google Scholar; and, ‘Sólo de caza y robos vivían los indios?’, 5–24Google Scholar; Mandrini, Raúl J. and Ortelli, Sara, Volver alpais de los araucanos (Buenos Aires 1992) 49–116Google Scholar.
34 Piana, Ernesto L., ‘Yacimiento Cerro Los Viejos’ in: Toponimia y arqueología del siglo XIX en IM Pampa (Buenos Aires 1981) 189–235Google Scholar.
35 Mandrini, Raul J., ‘La agricultura indígena en la región pampeana y sus adyacencias (siglosXVIII-XIX)’, Anuario del IEHS 1 (1986) 11–43Google Scholar.
36 Mandrini, Raúl J., ‘Pedir con vuelta: Reciprocidad diferida o mecanismo de poder?’, Antropológicas Nueva Epoca 1 (Mexico 1992) 63Google Scholar. A particular group, related to chieftains and family heads was that of agregados or allegados, who sometimes got to constitut e actual clienteles, performing different duties and missions for their master. The number of agregados revealed wealth and authority. Also: Mandrini, and Ortelli, , Volver al país, 121–135Google Scholar.
37 In spite of its importance, there are just a few specific works on the subject: Jones, Kristine, ‘La Cautiva: An Argentine Solution to Labor Shortage in the Pampas’ in: Mendez, L. F. Clay, Bates, L. W. eds, Brazil and Rio de la Plata: Challenge and Response (Charleston 1983) 91–94Google Scholar; Mayo, Carlos, ‘El cautiverio y sus funciones en una sociedad de frontera: El caso de Buenos Aires (1750-1810)’, Revista de Indias 45/175 (1985) 235–243Google Scholar; Socolow, Susan M., ‘Los cautivos espanoles en las sociedades indigenas: El contacto cultural a traves de la frontera argentina’, Anuario del IEHS 2 (1987) 99–136Google Scholar; Villar, Daniel, ‘Sobre la condición de los cautivos en las sociedades indigenas de la región pampeana (siglo XIX)’, Actas de las Déamasjornadas de Investigatión de la Facultad de Cientias Humanas de la Universi-dad National de La Pampa (1997) 269–283. The role played by those captives, their insertion in the Indian society, and the category where they should be placed have not been defined yet. In general, they may be considered slaves, but this does not mean defining the Indian society as slavish. The ‘slave’ category is not univocal: even in the Classical World, it took up different forms, and the discussion arisen from 1970 accounts for this fact. In speaking of slaves, I do not think of the ‘slave-commodity’ of the Classical period, but of the slaves in Homer's world or in Rome's first timesGoogle Scholar
38 Reproduction is a form of production. Production, which is human life's basis, obviously includes mankind reproduction as its most essential component: Croix, G. E. M. de Ste., The Class Struggle in the Antient Greek World, from Archaic Age to the Arab Conquist (Ithaca 1981) 98–99.Google Scholar Also Meillassoux, Claude, Maidens, Meal and Money: Capitalism and the Domestic (Cambridge 1981) 33–49Google Scholar.
39 Mandrini, , ‘Pedir con vuelta’, 66–67Google Scholar; Mandrini, and Ortelli, , Volver al país, 157–178Google Scholar.