â•œpurÃºs songâ•š: nationalization and tribalization in

Tipití: Journal of the Society for the Anthropology of LowlandSouth AmericaISSN: 2572-3626 (online)

Volume 4Issue 1 Special Issue in honor of Joanna Overing: In theWorld and About the World: Amerindian Modes ofKnowledge

Article 13

May 2006

“Purús Song”: Nationalization and Tribalization inSouthwestern AmazoniaPeter GowDepartment of Social Anthropology, University of St. Andrews, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.trinity.edu/tipiti

Part of the Anthropology Commons

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ Trinity. It has been accepted for inclusion in Tipití: Journal of the Societyfor the Anthropology of Lowland South America by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ Trinity. For more information, please [email protected].

Recommended CitationGow, Peter (2006). "“Purús Song”: Nationalization and Tribalization in Southwestern Amazonia," Tipití: Journal of the Society for theAnthropology of Lowland South America: Vol. 4: Iss. 1, Article 13.Available at: http://digitalcommons.trinity.edu/tipiti/vol4/iss1/13

http://digitalcommons.trinity.edu/tipiti?utm_source=digitalcommons.trinity.edu%2Ftipiti%2Fvol4%2Fiss1%2F13&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages


http://digitalcommons.trinity.edu/tipiti/vol4?utm_source=digitalcommons.trinity.edu%2Ftipiti%2Fvol4%2Fiss1%2F13&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

http://digitalcommons.trinity.edu/tipiti/vol4/iss1?utm_source=digitalcommons.trinity.edu%2Ftipiti%2Fvol4%2Fiss1%2F13&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages



http://digitalcommons.trinity.edu/tipiti/vol4/iss1/13?utm_source=digitalcommons.trinity.edu%2Ftipiti%2Fvol4%2Fiss1%2F13&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages


http://network.bepress.com/hgg/discipline/318?utm_source=digitalcommons.trinity.edu%2Ftipiti%2Fvol4%2Fiss1%2F13&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

http://digitalcommons.trinity.edu/tipiti/vol4/iss1/13?utm_source=digitalcommons.trinity.edu%2Ftipiti%2Fvol4%2Fiss1%2F13&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

mailto:[email protected]

Tipití (2006) 4(1&2):271–294 © 2006 SALSA 271ISSN 1545-4703 Printed in USA

“Purús Song”: Nationalization andTribalization in Southwestern Amazonia

PETER GOWDepartment of Social Anthropology, University of St. [email protected]

BeforeIwenttodofieldworkamongthePiroandAsháninkapeopleoftheBajoUrubamba,somewisesoulgavemesomepithyadviceabouthowtodoethnography: takewithyouanethnographyyouadmireandjusttrytoimitateit.ItookThe Piaroa,byJoannaOveringKaplan,abookIhadreadandadmiredbeforeshebecamethesupervisorofmydoctoralwork.Headingtothefield,Ievenboughtasecondcopy,suspectingthatmytreasuredfirstcopymightnotsurvivetheprocessoffieldwork.Asithappened,thebooknevermadeittotheBajoUrubambaRiver,becauseIgaveitawaytoaverykindPeruviananthropologist. IgavethatbooktothismanbecauseitwastheonlyobjectthatIthenpossessedvaluableenoughtoproperlyexpressmyprofoundgratitudetohim.ThismeantthatIendedupinthefieldwithJean-PaulSartre’sCritique of Practical Reason,PierreBourdieu’sOutline of a Theory of Practice,andJeanBaudrillard’sThe Mirror of Production,andwithonlymyvividmemoriesofThe Piaroa.IsetaboutdoingethnographyamongthePiroandAsháninkapeoplewiththatbookasmyspiritualguide,evenifitcouldnolongerbemyday-to-dayinstructionmanualofhowtodoit. Oneimagefromthatbookhasalwaysstayedwithme.CharacteristicallyofOvering’swork,thatimageisaPiaroaone.Shequotesoneinformantasfollowsonthepowersofruwang,Piaroashamans:

“Averypowerfulthinkercanseealltheworldasoneplace.Butthisisbadforhim,anditonlyleadstoproblemswhenhehassuchpowerbecausehesees too much.Hemayseethatachisapo(brother-in-law)inthenextItso’de(settlement) is angry. Andwhenhe sees thishe thinks thathis chisapo isangrywithhim,thoughprobablyheisnot.Heverylikelywillretaliatethenfornogoodreasonatall.ThegreatRuwangmustdevelopcontrolledabilitytohavevisionsofotherplacesandofthefuture,andthecontrolledabilitytotransformhimselfthroughhisthoughts.Itmustbelikeasmallhousewithinhisthoughts,boundandtight.Buttoooftenpeoplewantstrongerpowersthanthis”(1975:63;emphasisintheoriginal).

This statement is haunting in its distinctive Amazonian take onknowledge. Contrary to theEnglish idiom that a littleknowledge is a

1Published by Digital Commons @ Trinity, 2006

272 Peter Gow

dangerous thing, this Piaroa speaker implies the opposite: too muchknowledge is dangerous. This is the challenge posed to academicanthropologyby the thoughtworldsof indigenousAmazonianpeoples.Professionallycommittedtogeneratingmoreandmoreknowledgeaboutthesepeoples,weactdirectlycountertotheirownpoliticsofknowledge.Whenmyinformantsreplytomyquestions,astheyoftendo,with“Idonotknow!”mygeneraldisappointmentatmyfruitlesslineofquestioningisaccompaniedbyamorespecificpoliticaldisappointmentaboutwhyIcannotmakethesamehonestreplytomostquestionsfromcolleaguesandstudents.Whydowealwayshavetoknoweverything? HereIwanttoexploreanindigenousAmazonianpoliticsofknowledgefromoneofwhatwould seembe its least promising facets, that is, thesystematic erasure of memories of a series of past events affecting PiropeoplelivingonthePurúsriverinthefirstdecadeofthetwentiethcentury.In this case, the erasure of these past events is so advanced that, fromethnographicevidencecollectedfrom1980onwards,itwouldbehardtoevensuspectthem. However, thedocumentaryarchiverecordstheminconsiderabledetail, for theseeventsmatteredmuchto thenation-statesofPeruandBrazil,andmuchwasdonetocommemoratecertainaspectsofthem.WhatPiropeoplehaveeffectivelyerased,theinstitutionoftwonation-stateshaveaccumulatedandpreserved.Itisthesecontrastingpoliticsof knowledge, which I here term“tribalizations” and“nationalizations,”thatIaddressinthisessay.ThekeycontrastisbeautifullyencapsulatedinthePiaroaman’scomment:“Itmustbe likeasmallhousewithinhisthoughts,boundandtight. But toooftenpeoplewantstrongerpowersthanthis.”

THE PURÚS RIVER

ThemostproductiveperiodofmyoriginalfieldworkwaswhenIlivedasaguestinthehouseoftheYeyeClotildeGordónandDonMauricioFasabi.Ilistenedtothemtalkingtoeachotherandtomyselfonaneverydaybasis.Iwasjustthere,ayoungmanwhorespondedtotheirremarkablewillingnesstoallowmeintotheirliveswithmyinsistentquestions.Theytold me that Clotilde’s father Maximiliano Gordón had lived on thePurúsRiver,fartotheeast,alongwithmostotherUrubambaPiropeople.ClotildetoldmethatherfatherhadgonetherewithhisbossShargi.Thehistorical archive records this latter man’s name as Carlos Scharff, andthatmanyPiropeoplemovedfromtheUrubambatothePurúsasdebtslavesofrubberbosseslikeScharffwhowereseekingtoexploittherich

2

Tipití: Journal of the Society for the Anthropology of Lowland South America

http://digitalcommons.trinity.edu/tipiti/vol4/iss1/13

“Purús Song” 273

standsoftherubber-producingcaucho(Lat.Castilloa elastica)ofthelatterriver.ThesePiropeoplereturnedfromthePurúsfollowingthecollapseofrubberpricesin1912.In1980,noneofmyinformantswereoldenoughto remember living there, although they told me that their older deadrelativeshad lived andworked rubber there. Because itwasoutsideoflivingmemory,Piropeoplehadlittletosayaboutit. Inmanyways,thePirolivedworldcorrespondscloselytoLévi-Strauss’sconcept of the cold society (1966), for the Piro people have effectivelyevacuated their accounts of the recent prelived memory past—the pastthatisbeyondlivedmemory—byreducingittoarelativelystereotypicalsequencethatIhavediscussedindetailelsewhere(1991,2001).UnlikemanyWesterners,Piropeopledonotmemorialize thepast. FollowingLévi-StraussandOvering,ItendtothinkofthisasapositivefeatureofthelivedworldofthePiro.Piropeopleareunburdenedbytheneedtocreatemuseumsorarchives. Theyshowawillingnessto letbygonesbebygones that is personally congenial to me. Questions about the pastto Piro people, which in my experience of my own lived world rapidlylead to trouble,are treatedaseither issuesof livedmemoryoras issuesofcosmogony. Piropeople, so tospeak,donot“dohistory.” Attemptstogetthemtodosoaremetwithevasion.Whodidwhattowhomandwhen—theessenceofourtakeonhistory—seemstobeoffensivetothem.Indeed,Piropeople’sunderstandingofconflictislinkedtothequestionofhistory,oforigins.Intheirreactiontoadisputebetweenchildren,theirinterestisnotinjusticeinoursense,whoisrightandwhoiswrong,butin“Whostartedit?”Onceachildhassufferedanequalnumberofblowsasanotherchildhaslanded,thefightisover,andforgotten.

POROSO SHIKALE, “PURÚS SONG”

ThereisonePiroaccountoftheirtimeonthePurúsriver.Itisasongabout life on the Purús, Poroso shikale (“Purús Song”). This song wassungformebyaPirowomancalledTeresainSepahuain1988,andwasrecordedandtranslatedbymylatecompadrePabloRodriguezManchinari.Itswordsareasfollows:

Gike nikekowakni, poroso, poroso,Gike nikekowakni, poroso, poroso.Gachawripjixipje nika koraka, Korakale, koraka,Korakale, koraka,Porotojipje nika koraka,

3

“Purús Song”: Nationalization and Tribalization in Southwestern A

Published by Digital Commons @ Trinity, 2006

274 Peter Gow

Korakale, koraka,Korakale, koraka,Gike nikekowakni, poroso, poroso,Wane rawanatana porosole, poroso.

Pablo Rodriguez translated this song into Spanish for me, and myEnglishtranslationisasfollows:

Theydonoteatwellthere,thePurúsRiver,thePurúsRiver,Theydonoteatwellthere,thePurúsRiver,thePurúsRiver.Heeatsjustchicken’sfeet,theboss,Thepoorlittleboss,theboss,Thepoorlittleboss,theboss.Heeatsjustbeans,theboss,thepoorlittleboss,Thepoorlittleboss,theboss,Thepoorlittleboss,theboss.Theydonoteatwellthere,thePurúsRiver,thePurúsRiver.WhentheylivedonthepoorlittlePurúsRiver,thePurúsRiver.

Althoughsungbyawoman,“PurúsSong”seemstobelongtoaratherenigmaticgenrecalledinPirojeji shikale(“men’ssongs”).Isayenigmaticbecause I have never heard a Piro man sing such a song, apart from ayoungmaninLesBlank’sfilm,The Burden of Dreams,aboutthemakingofWernerHerzog’sfilm Fitzcarraldo(seeBlankandBogan1984:41–42).“Men’ssongs”seemtohavedisappearedasanactivityofPiromen.Myknowledgeofthegenrecomesfromwhatwomenhaveperformedofitforme,ortoldmeaboutit. In conversation, Joanna Overing recently described our task ascombining thebestofAmericanculturalanthropologywith thebestofEuropeansocialanthropology.Theculturalanthropologists,shetoldme,aregreatatanalyzingwhatpeoplesay.However,shesuggested,wealsoneedtolookattherelationbetweenwhoistalkingandwhoislistening,which iswhat thesocialanthropologistsdosowell. “PurúsSong,” likeitsgenre, is ahistorical enigmaandpresents a serious challenge to thisproject.Ihavenoideawhocomposedthissongnorwhy,anditisunlikelythatwewilleverknow.Furthermore,because“men’ssongs”arenolongerperformedbymen,thedynamicsofthisgenrearehardtoanalyze:whois singing the song, aboutwhom, and towhom? As such,PurúsSongposesanalmostclassicalcaseofthemethodologicalproblemsofhistoricalanthropology.AsaPiroperspectiveonanimportantphaseintherecenthistorical experiences of Piro people, this song is as precious as it isenigmatic. Lackingall of theprecisionofwritten eyewitness accounts,

4




andcomingfromagenrethatiseffectivelydefunct,itnonethelesspresentsuswithakindofeyewitnesstestimonytoremoteevents. Whatcanwedowiththissongasahistoricaldocument?First,itdoesseemtoprovideahistoryinaPirosense.Whilesuxo shikale(“women’ssongs”),quotemythicbeings,andkagonchi shikale(“shaman’ssongs”),quoteeternalsupernaturalbeings,twoofthethreeexamplesIhaveof“men’ssongs”refertoexperiencesthatareseenbyPiropeopleasbeingcharacteristicoftheirrecenthistory,thatis,theyareconcernedwithrelationswithwhitebosses. Further,allPirodiscoursethatissungismarkedbyslidsubjectposition.Thesingerisnevertheoriginalspeaker/singerofthewords(seeGow2001;alsoseeViveirosdeCastro1986andSeeger1987). “PurúsSong”isthereforeprobablynotaneyewitnessaccount.Itismuchmorelikelytobeasungquotationofanotherman’seyewitnessaccount. Minimally,thesongcallsattentiontotwosetsofpeoplewhoatebadly,asthegeneralsufferingofacollective“they”isjuxtaposedwiththespecificsufferingofthe“poorlittleboss,”whohasonlychicken’sfeetandbeanstoeat.“Poorlittleboss”isaveryironicsentiment,sinceboss/workerrelationsare, forPiropeople, characterizedby awoeful absenceof sympathy. Ifthe“poorlittleboss” iseatingsobadly,thenhisworkersmustbeeatingmuchworse. This iswhatmakesmesuspect that thesinger isquotinganotherman,whohasexpressedthisabsurdsympathyforboththe“poorlittleboss”and for the“poor littlePurús river,” rather than for thePiropeoplewhohavesufferedmuchworse.PiropeopleareappropriateandmeaningfulobjectsofaPiroman’scompassion(Gow1991),whilebossesandriversarenot.Asismadeexplicitinother“men’ssongs,”theabsurdityofthesentimentexpressedinthesongleadsmetosuspectthattheoriginalspeakerwasdrunkandsentimental. Giventhenatureofmale-on-malerelations,thespeakerwasalmostcertainlyasexualrivalofthecomposer,anditislikelythatthesongwasspecificallycomposedtoridiculehim. Furthermore,chicken’sfeetandbeansarenotnikchi potu(“realfood”)asfarasPiropeopleareconcerned,butkajitu nika(“whitepeople’sfood”)foodthatPiropeopledonotlikeeating(Gow1991).ThesongthereforeexpressestheheightenedsufferingofPiropeople,whohavebeenforcedtoeat“whitepeople’sfood,”thoughnotenoughofit,andhencetheincreasedabsurdityoftheoriginalspeaker’swastedsympathyfortheboss. The“here”ofthesongisclearlynotthePurús,butrathertheUrubamba.Thesongalsoconnectsthissufferingtobeing“faraway”(Piro:wajra, gi gowuko).Teresahadsungthissonginthecontextofajourneythatwasaboutsongs.WhileIhadinitiatedthisjourneyuptheUrubambaRiverinanattempttostudyPirovisualart,Pablohaddecidedthatwhatweweredoing was recording “women’s songs.” Piro visual art is a distinctively

5



276 Peter Gow

femaledomain.Knowledgeaboutitisnotsharedwithmen,oratleastnoteasily.“Women’ssongs,”bycontrast,activelytargetmen,andarehencealegitimateportofentryformenintowhatPirowomenknow.ItseemslikelythatTeresawasstimulatedtosingthissongpreciselybecausePablo,her young kinsman, was wajra, “far away” from home. Two days afterrecordingthissong,hespontaneouslycommented:“Today,Ifeelfarawayfrommyhouse.YesterdayinSepahua,IdidnotfeelthatIwasfarawaybecauseIwaswithclosekinspeople.ButnowIfeelfaraway.”Pablosaidthistome—amanwhomanifestlywasvery“faraway”fromhome. Inaddition,Poroso,thewordforthePurúsRiverinthesong,isnotaPirotoponym.ThePirocalledthisriver,whichtheyknewwell,Kokga,“CocaRiver,”aformthatenteredSpanishandPortugueseasCujar,thecurrenttermfortheheadwatersofthePurús.“Purús”itselfisaPortuguesetoponym,andPoroso shikalesuggeststhatthecomposerofthissongwasmakingspecificreferencetothisriverasexperiencedbyBrazilianpeople.

ANOTHER MEAL ON THE PURÚS

Thequestionthenbecomes,whatwasamealonthePurúsduringthisperiodlike?Fortuitously,wehaveaneyewitnessaccountinthedocumentaryarchivethatcomesfromthepenofEuclidesdaCunha.DaCunhaisoneofthegreatmodernwritersofBrazil,authoroftheseminalOs sertões,aworkthatisessentiallyagenealogyofBrazilasamodernnation.ItrecountsthehistoryofadoomedrevolutionarymovementinBahia,ledbyAntoniooConselheiro(AnthonytheCouncillor)againsttheestablishmentofBrazilas a republican nation-state. Da Cunha also wrote a very short piececalled“SucedeuemCuranjá,”whichismuchmoreintimatelyconnectedtomythemehere.DaCunhawasintheareaastheleaderofthe“MixedPeruvian-BrazilianCommissionsfortheExplorationoftheUpperPurús,”whosePeruvianleaderwasCaptainoftheCorvetteDonPedroBuenaño.Hispiecegoeslikethis,inmyownpoortranslation:

IthappenedinCuranjáonthe3rdofJuly. Theprincipalpeopleoftheplaceofferedabanquettous(tothePeruvianchiefandtome).Iaccepteditwithpleasure:Istillintheillusionofasympathythatwouldsoondisappear. Iwenttothe location(acommercialhouseofC. Scharff given over to the management of his bookkeeper, the GermanAlf.Schutz)—andwasimmediatelytakenabackbytheprofusionofPeruvianflagsinmarkedcontrasttotheabsenceofours—althoughitwasextremelyeasyforthehostsofthepartytoacquireitintheirownencampment. Notingthisfact,Ithoughtofleavingandwaitedforthefirstopportunitytodoso,withoutostentationorscandal,whenIobserved,amongthebranches

6




thatdecorated thepaxiuba (palmbark)wallsof the festivehall, somepalmleaveswhoseveryintenseyellowinnersurfacescontrastedwiththegreenoftherestofthefoliage.Itwasasolutiontotheconstrainedattitudethathadbeenimposedonmeby…thespectacularpatriotismofthosepeople.Infact,justafterbeingseatedatthetable,Iseizedthefirstword,withoutwaitingfortheopportunemomentfortoasts,andinarapidsalutationIthankedthemfortheirinvitation—andthisfortworeasons. Firstly—asanAmerican—feelingmyselfhappywithallthemanifestationsofcordialitybetweenmenoftwoalmostbrotherraces,perhapsdestinedtointimatealliancesinthefuturetoreacttotheimperialismofthegreatnations:inthesecondplace—asaBrazilian—profoundlymovedbythe“intelligentgentleness”andsplendidgallantrywithwhichtheyhadplacedinthathalltheflagofourland(thehosts’frightwascomplete!).Iexplaineditthensayingthatinsteadoflookingfortheflagofmycountryfromthemercenarybreastofafactorytheyhadsearchedforitinthemajesticbreastoftheforests,takingitfrompreciselythattreewhichamongallotherssymbolizesrectitudeandheight.AndIfinished:“Because,mydearPeruviansirs,mylandisasstraightandtallasthepalms… Icannotdescribe…theeffectofthesewords,northeembarrassmentwithwhichthePeruvianchiefandtheotherscomplimentedmedeclaring,“thatIhadunderstoodverywelltheirthoughts…”(1995:583).

This event occurred in 1905. Obviously, central to this piece is thecontestationofwhereCuranjawas—whetherinBrazilorinPeruatthatpoint. DaCunha’spiececomes fromhisnonofficial reporton the journey,and I read it inhisObra Completa. DaCunha’s accountof thisdinneristhereforenotsimplyanaccount,butratherawriter’saccount.Hehastakencontingentexperientialdetailandhappenstance,andfreightedthemwithmeaning. What is impressive in this shortpieceofwriting is themannerinwhichDaCunhaisabletoraisesomanyofthelargeissuesofhistimeandplaceinsofewwords:race,land,country,nation,nationalism,Pan-Americanism, internationalism, imperialism, anti-imperialism, andsoon.AllofthesebigideasaremadetohappeninCuranjá,aplaceoflittleapparentimportanceandofwhichmostpeoplehaveneverheard.DaCunha’spiece isapoeticcondensationofvery large,complex ideas intoanaccountofafairlytrivialeventinaplaceoflittleapparentsignificance.DirectedataliteraryaudienceinRiodeJaneiro,itisanexampleofDaCunha’ssensibility,andtakesaneventinadistantplacethattheaudiencedonotreallycareaboutandwillcertainlynevervisit,andreframesitintermsthatthereadingaudiencecanpotentiallyexperienceasexemplary.Hadyoubeenthere,thesewordscalltothereader,Ihopeyouwouldhavereactedinthesameway.Itmightbearguedthat“IthappenedinCuranjá”appears tohavenothing incommonwith“PurúsSong,”other than the

7



278 Peter Gow

mereunityofplaceandtime.Theycomefromdifferentculturalcontexts,arenotdemonstrablyindialoguewitheachother,andmyjuxtapositionofthemhereisopentoallthevalidcriticismsofpostmodern“collage.”Theconnectioninheresinme,andisanartefactofmylifeandofmyinterests,andisnotarealconnectionoutthereintheworld.Thisispossiblytrue,but theunityof timeandplace speaks, I think, to real andmeaningfulconnections and disconnections, and to their ongoing consequences indifferentlivedworlds.Differentlivedworldsisanoperationaldefinitionofwhatwecall“cultures”(Gow2001).Whileanthropologistshavehadagreatdealtosayaboutsocialchangeandculturalcontacts(connections),theyhavehadmuchlesstosayabouttheiraftermath(disconnections),themotivatederasureofcertainsocialrelationsinongoingsociallife. Ifwestudythemclosely,Ithinkthat“PurúsSong”and“IthappenedinCuranjá”haveagreatdealincommon.Bothrefertospatiotemporallydistantiatedeventsthatarebeingbroughtintothehereandnowasimbuedwith meaning. In both, the Purús River is held to be distal, far away,fromthepointofviewofthehearerandreader,butinboththeeventsareimaged asof immediate relevance to thepresent and future. Similarly,bothhingeonthemeaningoffoodandgenerositywithfood.Intheone,foodisinsufficientlyabundantandofthewrongsort,whileintheother,abundantandappropriatefood,andgenerositywithit,isassociatedwithalackofgenerosityonanotherlevel—toomanyPeruvianflagsandtoofewBrazilianflags. The twopiecesdiffer inan importantway,however. “PurúsSong”makesnoobviousappealtonationalism,while“IthappenedinCuranjá”isanalmosthallucinatoryhymntoasortofnationalismthatwenowfinddisturbing.Wenowrecognizethenationtobeaspecifickindofhumanlyconstructed artefact, and baulk at the suggestion that local vegetationcould,inanyway,pronouncethatplacetobeintheterritoryofonenationasopposedtotheterritoryofanother.ThedisturbingnationalismofDaCunha’spieceisobviouslyanartefactofthefactthathewasinCuranjaaspartofacommissiontofindoutwhereplaceslikethiswere,whetherinBrazilorPeru.

FIGHTING

DaCunhahadbeensenttothePurúsasleaderoftheBrazilianpartoftheMixedPeruvian-BrazilianCommissionsfortheExplorationoftheUpperPurús. Thiscommissionwas sentby the jointagreementof thePeruvianandBraziliangovernments,andwaspartoftheveryprolonged

8




attempts to establish finally the borders between Peru and Brazil thateffectivelystretchedbacktotheLineoftheTreatyofTordesillas/Todesilhasof1494. However, theproximate causewasfightingbetweenPeruvianandBrazilianrubberbossesandworkersin1903and1904. Hildebrando Fuentes, then Prefect of the Department of Loreto,quotestheeyewitnessaccountofthisfightingbytherubberbossVirgilioSalazar (1906:165–69). The following ismy summaryof that account,and Imakeno claims at all for its comprehensibility. Salazar puts thetroubledowntotheattemptsbytheBrazilianauthoritiestoimposeataxonPeruvianrubberbossesforworkingrubberinBrazilianterritory,evenalthoughthePeruvianswhereworkingabovethemouthoftheChandlessRiver,whichwasprovisionallyandmutuallyagreedtobethedividinglinebetweenthetwonationalterritories.OnSeptember25,1903thepolicecaptainofChandless,DonJorgeBarreto,hislieutenantDonCésarCosío,andnine soldierswere surroundedby200Brazilian soldiers andarmedrubberworkers,underthecommandofColonelFerreiraAraujoandhiscompatriotJoséCardosodaRosa.Aftertwodaysofsiege,theinvaderssentamessagethatthePeruviansshouldsurrenderandlowerthePeruvianflag. Four Peruvian rubber bosses told Barreto to retreat, and he wentdowntoManaus.LieutenantCosíowasorderedtogouptheChandlessRiverwith four soldiers,whowere thenall killedbyCaptainEmiliano“Marca-Fogo,”at theordersofCardosodaRosa. TheBrazilian troopsthenwentuptheChandlessandcapturedEliseoVasquez,VirgilioSalazar,andCarlosScharffinhiscampUnión.ThiscampwascompletelysackedandScharffwassentunderarmedguardtoManaus.TheBraziliansthendugthemselvesin,aboveChandlessinFortaleza. ScharffwasfreedinManaus,andthenwenttoIquitostoappealtoColonelPortillo,PrefectofLoreto,forhelp.ColonelPortillosentLopezSaavedraasthenewpolicecaptain,alongwithLieutenantsValdiviaandGiorzoandthirtymenofthemilitarygarrisonofLoreto,whowerejoinedby200rubberbossesandtheirworkers.TheyestablishedthemselvesinCuranja,andEngineerVonHasselwassenttoChandlesstotellCoronelAraujo and Cardoso da Rosa to leave immediately. Von Hassel wasimprisoned. A rescue party was sent, consisting of Federico Lafuente,FlorencioRuiz,andCarlosZeballosandsixbogas(canoepolers).Thesemenwere also imprisoned. Meanwhile therewas adispute inCuranjabecausetherubberbossesandworkersinsistedonbeingledbyScharffinanyfighting,notbyPoliceCaptainLopezSaavedra. The latterrefusedthis, and most of the company dispersed, leaving only sixty-seven menunderLopezSaavedra’scommand.LopezSaavedramovedhismendowntoSantaRosa,midwaybetweenCuranjaandChandless,andplacedthirty

9



280 Peter Gow

ontherightbankandthirty-sevenontheleftbank. On the thirtieth of March 1904, 270 Brazilians turned up in thesteamboats‘Acreana’and‘Mercedes’,stolenrespectivelyfromJulioAranaandCarlosScharff,andtheytooktherightbankgarrisonprisoners.Theleftbankforcewasthenattacked,buttheyresistedsoferociouslythatfifty-eight Brazilians died, and the rest retreated. The Peruvian forces thenretreatedinturn,andthenextdaytheBraziliansattackedtheemptycamp,andthen:

To avenge themselves for this defeat and this shame the Brazilians madevictimsofLafuente,Ruiz,ZeballosandthesixpolerswhotheyhadkeptincaptivitysincetheyarrivedatthemouthoftheChandlesstoparley.Theseresoluteandvaliantcitizenswereeachcrucifiedonawoodencrossandafterthiswasbathedinkerosene,thebodieswereplacedon2000piecesoffirewood,whichwerethensetfiretointheirfuriouscowardice(Fuentes1906:169).

Fuentescontinues:

The tomb of these unfortunate victims was later justly honoured by theCaptainoftheCorvette,DonPedroBuenaño,leaderofthePeruvianscientificcommissiontothePurús(1906:169).

BuenañowasthefellowguestwithDaCunhaatthedinnerofferedbyScharffanddescribedin“IthappenedinCuranjá,”andtheseantecedentsgosomewaytoexplainingtheheightenednationalismofthatevent.

NATIONALIZATIONS

Salazar’s accountabove suggests,on the faceof it, a simpleconflictbetweencitizensoftwonation-states.DaCunhaalsopresentsabasicallysimilaraccountofthisconflictinO Rio Purús(1995:753–810),althoughwiththepredictableshiftinnationalistmoralvalence.SalazararguesthatthewarwascausedbytheBraziliansinsistingontreatingrubberproducedbyPeruviansintheUpperPurúsasrubbergatheredonBraziliansoil,andhencesubjecttoaspecialtax.Clearly,thisrubberwasbeingproducedinPerubyPeruvians,andhenceexemptfromthistax,andsostatefunctionarieslikeColonelPortillohadtorespondtoappealstonationalintegrity.DaCunhapresentsitasaninvasionofBraziliannationalterritorybyPeruviansthathadtoberepelled. However,thestoryisrathermorecomplicated,andisreallyadramainternal to a family business empire, as described by Valdez-Lozano

10




(1944). CarlosScharffwasnotunknownto JoséCardosodaRosa, fortheformerwasanex-foremanofCarlosFermínFitzcarrald,andthelatterwasthestepfatherofFitzcarrald’swidowAuroraVelazco.Fitzcarraldhaddiedin1897,andwhilehiswidowandherstepfathermaintainedfinancialcontroloverhisrubbergatheringempire,operationalcontrolhadpassedtohisbrotherDelfín,whohadopeneduptherichrubberfieldsoftheUpperPurúsRiver.OnhisreturnfromthefirsttriptothePurús,hewaskilledby Amahuaca people in the portage back onto the Sepahua. EffectiveoperationalcontrolthenpassedtoScharff. ItseemsthatCardosodeRosasuspectedScharffofchicanery,giventhat gathered wild rubber was habilitado/aviado (“owed”), since it hadnotionallybeenproducedtocancelapreviouslyincurreddebt.CardosodeRosasawthisrubberashisrubber,sinceitscollectionhadbeenfinancedbyhim,oratleastbyhisstepdaughter.Scharff,bycontrast,wastreatingtherubberashisown,whichhewasfreetoselltowhomsoeverhepleased.Scharffwaswithinhis rightshere.Whileheprobablyaccepted thatheowedsomerubbertoFitzcarrald’swidow,itwasnotcertainthatheowedthisrubbertoher,ratherthansomeotherrubberhewouldproducelater.RatherthansendingtherubberbackovertotheSepahuaandhencedowntoIquitosonthePeruvianAmazon,ScharffwasattemptingtosellitdownthePurúsdirectlytoManausontheBrazilianAmazon.Intermsoftaxrevenue,therefore,CardosodeRosaapparentlywasactinginthenationalinterests of Peru, while Scharff was acting in the national interests ofBrazil. What is interesting about this case was the ease with which thesepeople were able to mobilize the forces of nation-states, politicians,and soldiers for their own ends, and the ease with which the internalwranglingofasinglecompanycouldberepresentedasadisputebetweennational interestsandnationalcitizens. Infact, it isamootpointastowhatextentanyofthenonofficialparticipantsintheseeventscaredabouttheiraffiliationwithnation-states.JoséCardosodaRosawasfromBrazil,certainly,buthewasmarriedtothewidowofaPeruvianarmyofficerandwasresidentinIquitos.HisstepdaughterAuroraVelascodemonstratedtheprofundityofher allegiance toPerubymigrating toPariswithherfourchildrenonthedeathofherhusband.HerhusbandCarlosFermínFitzcarrald,aPeruviannationalhero,oncetoldAurora’sbrotherthathewasArgentinean,andisvariouslyrecordedasbeingIrishorAmericaninthelocallypejorativesenseofgringo,fromtheUnitedStatesofAmerica(Reyna1942).CarlosScharff,thePeruvianbossattheheartofthewar,isoftendescribedas“German”intheaccounts,andwasprobablyborn,oratleastraised,inBrazil.Nationalizationseemstohavebeenaresourcefor

11



282 Peter Gow

peoplelikeCardosodaRosaandScharff,somethingthatcouldbecalledinto toplay. For them,nationsweremostdecidedlynot the“imaginedcommunities”ofBenedictAnderson,contextsinwhichtoact,butratherinstruments thatcouldbebrought intoplay inpursuitofverydifferentends. ItwouldbedifficulttosolvethisfightonthePurúsRiverinthePiromanner. “Who started it?”—thePiroquestion askedof anydispute insearchofapeacefulresolution—isherethekeypointofthedispute.Theanswertothequestion,“Whostartedit?”quicklyshiftsfromScharfforCardosodaRosato“thePeruvians”or“theBrazilians,”inanimpressivepieceofdisputeescalation.

NAMES

In Salazar’s account, as cited by Fuentes, there is an interestingeconomy of names, making it unclear who is and who is not named.Peruvianstatefunctionariesarenamedalongwithspecificationofmilitaryrankorpoliticaloffice,e.g.,PoliceCaptainBarreto,EngineerVonHassel,etcetera.Rubberbossesarenamedwiththerespectful“Don,”e.g.,DonCarlosScharff,etcetera.Othermen,presumablylessimportant,arenamedbutreceiveno“Don,”whileothersareunnamedandsimplyidentifiedbyprofessionandnumber,e.g.,“thirtysoldiers”or“sixpolers.”Salazarherefollows standard onomastic practice for his social class, naming higherstatuspeopleasinitiatingandcontrollingagentsoflowerlevelanonymousmassesofworkerswhofollowtheirorders.Hemaywellhaveknownthenamesofsomeorallofthethirtysoldiersorsixpolers,butSalazarclearlydidnotseesuchnamesasimportantenoughtodetailtoFuentes,orifhedid,Fuentesdidnotbothertocommitthemtowriting. Obviously,Fuentes’accountofSalazar’saccountwouldquicklybecomeunwieldyifeveryparticipantineveryeventhadtobenamed.However,inanimportantsense,a“historicalaccount”istheproductionofacondensednarrativeofaseriesofhighlycomplexeventsbytheforegroundingofkeyagentsandthe“backgrounding”ofothers.AsLévi-Strausspointedout,history isalwaysasimplificationofthepast,andwhat is interestingforanthropologists iswho ismadeanonymousandgeneric (1966). AsthehistorianCarloGinzburgputit:“WhobuiltThebesofthesevengates?”BertoltBrecht’s“literateworker”wasalreadyaskingthis.Thesourcestellusnothingabout these anonymousmasons,but thequestion retains allitssignificance(1992:xiii).Ginzburghereidentifiesthekeyproblemforstudieslikethepresentone,namelythatallhistoricalanalysesfalteronthe

12




factofthearchivebecausethearchivewaswrittenbyandforcertainelites,andconcretelyreproducestheirinterests. Thatsaid,ifthearchiveisnevergoingtotelluswhatthethirtysoldiersorsixpolersthoughtaboutevents,wecanstill,Ithink,extractinterestingdatafromitforanthropologicalpurposes.Forexample,thereisadeceptivelysimpleconnectioninSalazar’saccountbetweennamedpeopleandnamedplaces.Forexample,DonCarlosScharffisspecifiedasPeruvian,thatis,auniquenamedpersonisplacedinaclassthatderivesitsmeaningfroma unique named nation, Peru. Contrast this with the following, whereSalazar, cited by Fuentes, names a series of workers: “Peruvian workersAmadeoRuiz(sapino)ElíasFlores(id.)EleuterioBarbarán(moyobambino)GregorioTalese(iquiteño)andEustaquioRamírez(tarapotino)”(1906:167).Theseuniquenamedpersonswithouttherespectful“Don”arelinkedtoclassesofattachmenttoplacebelowthelevelofthenation,likeSaposoa,Moyobamba,Iquitos,andTarapoto.Thesixpolersarealsojustthat.Theyareunnamedandunlinkedtouniquenationsoreventoplaces. Salazarherefollowsaclassificatoryschemaofraza(“race”).Thosewhoareonomasticallyemplacedbynationaloneareblancos(“whitepeople”).Those who are onomastically emplaced by reference to towns such asSaposoaaremestizos(“mixedbloodpeople”),ormozos(“workers”).Andthosewhoarenotonomasticallyemplacedatallarenecessarilymembersofthethirdcategory, indios, (“Indians”). Thistriadicracialschemawascentraltothesocialrelationsoftherubber industry,asIhavediscussedelsewhere(1991).IwanttonotethatthereasonthatthesixpolersarenotonomasticallyemplacedisbecauseSalazartookforgrantedthattheywerewheretheybelonged,thatis,theywereintheirownterritory.Theywere,inshort,Piropeople. This is an important point, because even if Peruvian rubber bosseswereconcernedtodefinespecificplacessuchasCuranjaas“Peruvian,”theyneverattemptedtoclaimownershipofterritory.Atmost,theyclaimedownershipofspecificpostsandhouses.Implicitly,theyalwaysacceptedtheterritorialpriorityoflocal“Indian”people.ThiswasinmarkedcontrasttoBrazilwhere,duetothedifferentmodeofrubberproduction,rubberbossesdidseekcontrolofindigenousterritoriesaspersonalproperty(seediscussionofDaCunha’saccountinGow1991).Thereisanimportantreason for this beyond the technicalities of rubber production. AnyPeruvian boss’s claim to blanco status depended on disconnection fromplaces, because connection toplace inPerumeantbeing mozo or indio.That is why Fitzcarrald, born and raised in Ancash, claimed variouslyto be Argentinean, Irish, or American—anything but a man just fromAncash,de Ancash no más.ThisexemplaryPeruvianhero,knownforhis

13



284 Peter Gow

rabidpatriotismandhisopeningupofPeruvianAmazoniaforthenation,alsohadtobedemonstrablynon-Peruvian.

HEROIC AND COMMONPLACE STORIES

OneofthemostfamousofFitzcarrald’sacts,andthesourceofhisheroicstatusas agreatPeruvian,washisdiscoveryof the Istmo de Fitzcarrald,the portage between the Mishahua and Manú rivers, which linked theUcayaliandMadredeDiosriversystems.ThislinkageallowedexportofrubberfromthelatterareaviaIquitos,thusbypassingthemajorrapidsontheMadera/Madeira.ThisisoneofaseriesofactsthatcharacterizethehistoryofSouthwesternAmazoniaasaseriesofheroicdiscoveries.ThediscoveryoftheUpperPurúsismoreambiguous,foritisvariablyattributedto Delfín Fitzcarrald (Carlos Fermín’s brother); to Leopoldo Collazos(Fitzcarrald’s foreman); to Manuel Urbano (a trader from ManacapuruontheAmazonnearManaus);ortoWilliamChandless(anEnglishmansentbytheRoyalGeographicalSocietytosurveytheriversofthispartofAmazonia).GiventhatChandlessreachedtheuppermostreachesofthePurúsinanexpedition(1864–1865),andpublishedascientificreportonthisintheJournaloftheRoyalGeographicalSociety,prioritytendstogotohim,withdueacknowledgmentofUrbano’spriorexpedition.ToDelfínFitcarraldandLeopoldoCollazosfallsthedisputedpriorityofdiscoveringtheportagebetweentheSepahuaandCujar,respectivelyintheUrubambaandPurúsvalleys(seeDaCunha1995:753–810andFaura-Geig1964). These discoveries can, however, be read in a completely differentway. WhatCarlosFermínFitzcarrald“discovered”wassimplythePiroportagepointbetweentheMishahuaandManúrivers.ThesameistrueforDelfínFitcarrald’s orLeopoldoCollazos’ “discovery” of theportagebetween the Sepahua and Cujar. These were standard routes used byPiropeoplemovingbetweenriversystems,andareregularlymentionedintheearlierliterature.Piro-speakingpeoplesintheUcayali-Urubamba,Manú,Piedras,Purús,andYuruá/JuruávalleysengagedinaverycomplexlongdistancetradingsystemoveravastareaofSouthwesternAmazoniaandthenorthernandsouthernPeruvianAndes that iswell-attested forthemid-nineteenthcenturyandwascertainlyverymucholder(seeGow1991).Whatthe“discoveries”relatedinthehistoriesactuallyrelateistheincreasinglydirectarticulationofthistradingsystemwiththeburgeoningrubberextractionindustryinthelatterhalfofthenineteenthcentury. Considertheword“Curanjá”itself.Thisword,strippedofitsspurious

14




accent, comes from the Piro kolamaga (“Green Scum River”) but isrecordedintheliteratureinhispanicized/lusianizedformsas“Curamaha”and“Curanja/Curanha,”becausePirospeakershabituallyelidevowelsinfrontofsuffixeslike—ga(“liquid,flow,river”).Indeed,theUpperPurús,aswiththeneighboringareas,istodayfullofplaceswithPirotoponyms,reflectingthemannerinwhichitwasPiropeoplewhointroducedrubberbossestotheirtradenetwork. This Piro origin of the discovery can be given stronger form, fortheexpansionoftherubberextractionindustryunquestionablyreflecteddynamictransformationsinthattradingsystemitself.Thiscanbetrackedintermsofmetalgoods(Piro:yowuma)inthesystem.Inthefirsthalfofthenineteenthcentury,thereseemtohavebeentwomajorsourcesformetalgoodsforthissystem:theFranciscanmissionsystemcenteredonSarayacuontheLowerUcayaliRiver,andtheannualtradefairatElEncuentroontheUpperUrubambaRiver(seediscussioninGow1991).ItispossiblethatthePiro-speakingKunibapeopleontheJuruáwereobtainingsuchgoods by trading downriver to the Amazon mainstream, but it is clearthatthePiro-speakingManitinerihadnotbeentradingdirectlyalongthePurúsuntilthearrivalofManuelUrbano,possiblyduetothepresenceoftheMurapeopleonthelowerreaches.Themajordynamicofthetradelaytothewest,andparticularlytothetraderoutesfocussedonSarayacu,whichwasinturntiedtothecommercealongtheAmazonbetweenBelemdoParáandMoyobambaintheHuallagavalleyontheedgeoftheAndes. While we know quite a lot about the exterior aspects of this tradesystemfromthedocumentaryarchive,weknowmuchlessaboutitsinteriordynamics. It seems that trading was crucial to political competitionamongPirochiefs,whowouldusetherelativevelocitiesoftheirtradingtransactionstoincreasetheirpogirchi(“fame,influence”)andtheirnetworksoffollowers.Onethingthatisclear,however,isthatPiro-speakingpeopleexperienced themselves as chronically undersupplied with metal goods,presumablybecausesuchgoodswerebeingconstantlypumpedintoareasremotefromtheirpointsofentryintothesystem. AkeyshiftinthistradesystemwastheinstallationofBraziliantradersintheCocamacommunityofNauta,at theconfluenceof theMarañonand Ucayali rivers, sometime in the 1830s. Urubamba Piro peoplerapidly seized this trading opportunity, and in 1854, told the Frenchtraveller Paul Marcoy that Nauta was in Brazil (1875:I, 508). UnliketheFranciscanpriests,theseBraziliantravellerswerepurelyinterestedinprofitandthusweremuchmorewillingtoincreasethevelocityoftradegoods.TheAmericannavalcaptainandspyHerndon(1991:250)recordsthatDonBernadinoCauper, aPortuguese traderofNauta,wasalready

15



286 Peter Gow

representingthistradeasaviamento/habilitación(“fittingout”)ratherthanasindependenttrading. However,thisisprobablynothowPiropeoplesawit. Astherubberextractionindustryexpanded,rubberbossesmoveduptheUcayaliRiverandtowardstheUrubamba,thehometerritoryofthePiro people. There they established specific alliances with Piro chiefs,whosefollowersbecametheirworkforce. ThereisnoreasontobelievethatPiropeopleexperienced thisprocessasanythingother thanhighlydesirable. Travelers from that time often record their wealth in tradegoodsand theirwillingness to travel todistant caucho areas,which theypresumably experienced as a continuation of older trading expeditions,withtheadvantagethatthetradegoodswerenowarrivingbysteamboat.Hence, depending upon your point of view, all such knowledge abouttrading. laboring, and traveling might either undermine our Westerntheories aboutoriginsand theheroic role attributed to“discoverers,”ortheymightsimplyservetoidentifynewheroes.

CHANDLESS’ ACCOUNT

TheEnglishgeographerWilliamChandless,whoeitherwasorwasnotthefirstnonindigenouspersontoreachtheupperPurús(1864–1865),describesanaspectofthiscomplextradesystemofPirospeakingpeoples,anditsarticulationwiththedevelopingrubberextractionindustry.AtthemouthoftheAracáriver(renamedtheChandlessinhishonor,andlocationof the trouble discussed above), the expedition met the Manetenerys.Chandlesswrote:

EvenoneknowingoftheexistenceoftheseIndians,andknowingoftheircomparative civilization, cannot but be struck, after travelling for manyweeksamongnakedandsuspicioussavages,withIndiansstillfurtherintheinterior,andcutofffromtheirnaturalchannelofcommunicationwiththeouterworld;yetwhowearclothes,andplantcottonandspinandweaveit,bothfortheirownuseandfortrade,andwhoshownottheleastfearbutthegreatestjoyatthesightofstrangers—unfortunately,itmustbeadded,whomeetthestrangerwithoffersofchildrenforsale,andwithotherofferssuchastravellersreporttobemadebythePolynesians(1866:101).

Hegoesontoexplainthat:

It is probable that the Manetenerys have for many years traded on theJuruá,andperhapsdirectwithwhitemen,towhom,however,theymaybe

16




knownbyadifferentname;andtheupperpartofthetribehave,orhavehad,communicationwiththeUcayali.TheyalwaysaddressonebythePortuguese“patricio”(countryman);theyknow,however,theSpanishwords“muchacho”and“muchacha,”andcallaknife“cuchero”(cuchillo).Ofthe“lingoageral”Iheardbutoneword,“pina”(fishinghook),andthatbutonce.Thougheagerforallarticlesof iron,theyhaveafairsupplyofthem,andknowperfectlythedifferent valuesof aPortugueseandanAmericanaxe; theyknowalsothevalueoftheirowncotton-cloth,andwillnot,asarule,sellitexceptforiron—anaxe,orknife,orapairofscissors,accordingtothesizeofthepiece:veryrarelyforalooking-glass(1866:101).

TheManitineriwereclearlyalsotradingdownriveralongthePurús,fortheyspokeatleastonewordofLingoaGeralalongwithsomePortuguese.ManuelUrbano,atraderfromManacapuruontheAmazonmainstream,whowasChandless’sguideandpredecessorasexplorerofthePurús,hadobtained a young Manitineri woman who taught him the Manitinerilanguageandwhowasclearlytradingwiththesepeoplealready. Furtherupriver,ChandlessmettheCanamarypeople,whotoldhimthat they really belonged on the Curumaha (Curanja) River, and werecertainly resident there. Chandless travelled furtherup thePurús fromthemouthoftheCuranja,andfoundanothervillageofindigenouspeoplewhohedescribedas:

…differentfromthosewehadyetseen,althoughalikeindress,&c.Theycalled themselves Catianás; but this seems to be merely a corruption of“Castillano.”TheyarecertainlynotCanamarys,andevidentlydonotthinkitacomplimenttobeconsideredsuch;nordotheyseemtobeManetenerys,thoughasillbredandimportunate,andgiventothieving…TheCanamarychieftoldustheywerenotnativesofthePurús,buthadcomefromarivertotheeast(1866:107).

ThesepeopleweremanifestlyUrubambaPiropeople. Chandlessisdescribingasetofindigenouspeoplesincomplexrelationswith each other and with other indigenous and nonindigenous peoplefurtherafield.Thesepeopleswereorderedbydifferentiationsandrelationsandwerepartofthecomplextradenetworkdiscussedbefore.Interestingly,these people reacted to Chandless with hints of the nation-state. TheManeteneryshailedhiminPortugueseasa“fellowcountryman,”whiletheUrubambapeoplestatedthattheywereCastellanos(“Castilians”). That,atleast,ishowChandlesssawit.IsuspectthatactuallytheManeteneryswere joyful that they now had direct access to wealth from Portuguesespeakersdownriver,whiletheUrubambapeoplewereannoyedthattheirtrademonopolyinthePurúsareaofwealththatoriginatedfromSpanish

17



288 Peter Gow

speakers had been breached. Nation-states were, so to speak, alreadyoperatingon thePurús longbefore anyagentof anation-state actuallyarrivedthere. Thereismoretoconsider,however.Arguably,byusingthePortugueseandSpanishlanguagesassymbolsoftheiralreadyexistingdifferencesfromeachother, thePiroandManitineripeoplewere already“nationalizing”thePurús,by simplyorienting themselves to twodifferent setsof tradepartners.Theywerenotdoingthisforthenation-statesofPeruandBrazil,and certainly not as Peruvian or Brazilian citizens, but rather by virtueoftheirownongoinginternaldifferentiationsfromeachother. WhatIsuggest is that phenomena that we tend to interpret as “modern”—theproductsof“hotsocieties”suchasthemodernnation-statesofPeruandBrazil—areactuallysomethingverydifferent.Theyare,infact,“tribal”phenomena—the products of “cold societies” such as the Piro and theManitineripeople.AneventsequenceinitiatedbyindigenousAmazonianpeopleexpandsoutwardsandbecomestransformedintoeffectslinkedtonation-states,whicharethenviewedastheircauses.ThisiswhatImeanbynationalization—theongoingeclipsingoftheactionsofnonnationalsocialrelationsandtheirrepresentationaseffectsofnationalsocialrelations. Therearetwopointstomakehere.First,thenationalizationofthepastisavirtuallyinevitableproductofhowwecometoknowaboutitthroughthe archive. Da Cunha could perhaps imagine a future Pan-Americananti-imperialism,buthecouldonlydoitthroughtheBrazilianizationofthepalmtreesthatgrewinCuranja,whichlaterbecamepartofPeru.ThepastofSouthwesternAmazoniacomestousalmostexclusivelyfromanarchivethatisconstructedinexplicitlynationalistterms.Itisinfernallydifficulttothinkbeyondthatframingofthepasttothesimplerealizationthatin1865Curanjawas,quiteliterally,nowhere,insofarasnodocumenthadyetbeenproducedthatcouldretrospectivelytelluswereitwas.Wehave no testimony from the indigenous people I have identified as keyagents in thishistory. For example, inBuenaño’s reportof the“MixedCommission,”thereisaphotographofScharff ’shouse,wherethatdinnertookplace(seeFigure1).IntheforegroundthereisalargegroupofPiropeople. If, as suggested above, the anonymous sixpolers immolated inSanta Rosa were Piro men, these people in the photograph were theirrelativesandpresumablyhadstrongopinionsaboutthesemurders. Butweknownothingaboutthoseopinionsoroftheirconsequences.Itisnotsimplythattheyweresystematicallyerasedfromthedocumentation,butthattheirowndescendantshadforgottenthem,orhadchosennottotellmeoranyoneelseaboutthem.

18




Figure 1: Piro workers at Carlos Scharff ’s house in Curanja, 1905[Anonymous1906:betweenpages58and59]

TRANSPORT, MEDIA, AND NATIONALIZATION

BenedictAnderson(1991)arguedforthecentralityofprintmediainthegenesisandmaintenanceofthenation-state,inthemannerinwhichlocal languages—newly reified in writing—gave readers a sense of animaginedcommunity.Forexample,readingtheBibleinGermangavethereaderimaginaryaccesstoacommunitythatwasgreaterthanthevillage,town,orcity inwhich that reader lived,yet smallerandmore intimate,more human, than the shared humanity that the Bible proposes. ForAnderson,printmediaarepotentduetotheirtransportabilityandtheirproliferation. AprintedBible inGermancan,at relatively lowcost,betransportedprettymuchanywhere,connectingdistantlocalesthatwouldproveprohibitivelyexpensiveifbodieshadtobetransportedinstead.Thevery reproducibilityofprintmedia and the fact that reproduction costsdropdramaticallywithprint,allowmediatoproliferateinanexponentialriseinapparentpersonalsocialrelations.Itisaveryseductivevision,withhotmetalastheoriginofallthepleasuresandterrorsofnationalism. IhavethealmostvisceralsensethatAndersoniswrong.IamconfirmedinthissuspicionbyAnderson’sremarkablyfrankadmissionintherevisededitionofImagined Communities, thatBrazilconstitutesanexceptionto

19



290 Peter Gow

hisgeneraltheory.Brazilisremarkable,Iagree,butanygeneraltheoryofnationalism that considersBrazil an ignorable exceptionhas somethingveryseriouslywrongwithit.AgainstAnderson,Isuggestthatprintmediaare central tonation-statesbecauseof theway that they can concretelytransportandproliferatespecificlocalclassinterests.PrintmediaallowadinnerinCuranja,itselfnobigdealtothosenotpresentandnotinvited,tomovetoRiodeJaneiro,tothererecordtheexemplaryoffenseagainstthePeruviannationbyaBraziliannational. ButDaCunha’spiecealsopotentially proliferates his fervent patriotic offense into the separatepersonalworldsofhis readers among the reading classesof that locale,and hence out into a wider social world defined as “Brazilian.” It is anationalization. AgoodexampleofthisisthatthefrontierbetweenPeruandBrazilisnotreallyinthePurúsarea.ItisprimarilyinaseriesofinscribeddocumentsinRiode Janeiroand inLima(andelsewhere), that is, inmetropolitancentersofcalculation,touseLatour’saptexpression(1988).ToberealizedinthePurús,thefrontierhastobetransportedfromthesemaps,writtendescriptionsandsoforthasorders tosoldiers,policeandborderguardswhohavetobesenttoliveinspecificpoststheretorealizethelocationofthefrontierasaphysicalreality.But,theyarenotnecessarilytakenveryseriouslybylocalpeople.In1987,IwastravellingdownthePurúsRiverinwhat isnowBrazil. Anold rubber tapper toldmeabout theborderdisputebetweenPeruandBrazil,“TheWarofSantaRosa”ashecalledit,whichhehadwitnessedonthatriverasaboy.Hetoldmethewarhadcosttwenty-onelives.Concludinghisstory,hereflectedonwhathesawasthepointlesslossofthishumanlife,andsaid:“A verdade é que esa terra nem é o Perú nem o Brazil. E a terra deles, é dos indios”(“Thetruthisthatthis landisneitherPerunorBrazil. This istheircountry, it is the landoftheindigenouspeople”).Similarly,Pancho,alocalCashinahualeader,toldmethatwhenhecrossedthefrontierandthesoldiersaskedforhisdocuments,hereplied,“Esa é a minha terra, não a sua, e não preciso de pedir permiso prá viajar nela!” (“This ismy land,not your land, and Idonotneedtoaskforpermissiontotravelinit”).Hecontinued,sayingthatthesoldiersacceptedhisargument.

“PURÚS SONG” REVISITED

“PurúsSong,”bycontrast,expressesalongingforwhatIwanttocalla“tribalization,”thatis,adesiretolivesocialrelationsatacertain(“tribal”)scale(Gow2001).Ittakesaseriesoflivedexperiencesofsufferingand

20




transforms them into a sociable drinking song. Specific experiences ofanger,violence,revenge,andgriefareevacuatedoftheirspecificemotionalcontentforspecificpeople,andaregeneralizedasanabsurdsongaboutanabsurdemotion. Thesufferingthatthesongdetails is locatedfaraway,over thereonthePurús river,notherewherewearegettingdrunkandmakingmerry. Thepainfulexperiencesof thosePiropeoplewhowentthroughthoseeventshavebeensurpassed,andarenowrememberedonlyinahumoroussong.Eventsandtheirattendantemotions,nownolongerongoing,arebeingactivelyovercomeandrenderedforgettable. Ithinkthatthereisstillmoretothisprocessoftribalization,foritalsoseemstohaveexpandedintotheverygenreinwhichitoccurred.Asnoted,Piromennolongersing jeji shikale (“men’ssongs”). Thecorrespondingactivegenresof“shaman’ssongs”and“women’ssongs”helpushere.Whenashamansingskagonchi shikale(“shaman’ssongs”),heverystronglyspecifieshimselfasashamanwiththecapacityofatransformedhuman,ahumanwhoisnowasupernaturalbeing.Whenwomensingsuxo shikale(“women’ssongs”), they strongly specify themselves as Piro women, speakers ofyiner-tokanu(“humanlanguage”),andassexuallyactiveloversofmenandpotentialoractualmothersofPirochildren.Similarly,ifPiromensangjeji shikale(“men’ssongs”),theywouldstronglyspecifythemselvesasPiromen,thatis,asaggressive,confrontational,andvindictiveintheirrelationswithotherPiromen.If,asarguedabove,“men’ssongs”werecomposedtoquoteandridiculeotherPiromenasmen,itwouldseemthatPiromencametodislikedoingthis.Thegenrewas,sotospeak,toodangerouslyhistoricalforPiromen,callingupthepastintheformofunfinishedcyclesofmalerivalry. Nolongerbeingactivelycomposed,thesesongssurviveonlyinthesungdiscourseofoldwomen. I refer to “men’s songs,” and their disappearance as a genre, as“tribalizations”becauseboththesongs,andtheirdisappearance,takethepotentiallydangerousongoingramificationsofthepastandneutralizethem.Theysmoothouttheramificationsofeventsfromthepast,ramificationsthatthreatentoproliferateintopresentsocialrelationsanddestroythem.ProliferatingramificationsheatthingsupandpresentPiropeoplewithanimageofthemselvesasa“hotsociety.”Inordertoretainthedesiredscaleoftheirsocialrelations,Piropeoplehavetogetridofhistoryandevenofthemeansofforgettingitmadepossibleinsong. Overing’s The Piaroa, as with so much of her work, is about thepositiveofwhatinitiallystrikesusasabsence.Inthatbook,sheshowsthatsymmetricallianceamongthePiaroadoesnotlinkgroupsconstitutedbyotherprinciplessuchasdescent,butratheristhefundamentalconstitutiveprincipleofthelocalgroupsthemselves.The“absence”ofdescentgroups

21



292 Peter Gow

ineverydayPiaroalifeisnotanegative,anotherofthemultitudeofthingsthatmostpeoplehavebutwhichPiaroaandotherindigenousAmazonianpeoples lack. She shows that it is a positive thing—an aesthetic andpoliticalchoice—tolivesociallyinthismanner.ThePiaroaarewellawarethatotherchoicesarepossible—andwere,orare,enactedbyothers(thegods in mythic times, white people, indigenous neighbors, the dead, etcetera)—but they (thePiaroa) live differently. Much had beenwrittenby anthropologists about bilateral cross-cousin marriage as a variant ofhumankinship,butOveringwascertainlythefirsttoshowthatitcouldarticulateacoherentpoliticalphilosophy.Indoingso,sheopenedatotallynewwayofthinkingaboutindigenousAmazoniansocieties. Tribalizationsarecommitmentstoacertainscale.AsOvering’sPiaroainformantnoted:“Averypowerful thinker can see all theworldasoneplace…”Thisabilityis,ofcourse,elaboratedfurtherinthequotationaswhatwemightthinkofasthediseaseknownasparanoia. ReadingDaCunha’s“Ithappened inCuranjá,”ashedescribes thatonedinnerwitheverescalatingpotentialsfordiscordandoffense,andthenseestheverytreesasspeakingoftheirloveofahomelandthatbureaucraticdiplomacywouldsubsequentlydenythem,weseethattheauthorisclearlyparanoidby the Piaroa definition. It has taken the long work of anthropology,including Overing’s prolonged and profound reflections on the Piaroa,todiscoverwhatDaCunhacouldnotknow.Itappearstomethatwisepoliticaladvicecouldhavebeenhadfromthose“savages”whosurroundedthathouseashesatdowntodine.

NOTES

Acknowledgments. MyfieldworkontheBajoUrubamba,between1980and2000,was funded by the Social Science Research Council, the British Museum, theNuffieldFoundation,theBritishAcademy,andtheLondonSchoolofEconomics.My most obvious intellectual debt is to Joanna Overing herself, as well as tocommentsonearlierversionsofthispaperbyFernandoSantos-Granero,GeorgeMentore, Stephen Hugh-Jones, and Minna Opas. I thank Conrad Feather,JadranMimica,UteEickelkamp,TaniaLima,andMarcioGoldmanforsharingtheirideas,andespeciallyCeciliaMcCallumforintroducingmetothePurúsandtoBrazil.

22




REFERENCES CITED

Anderson,Benedict 1991 Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of

Nationalism(EdiçãoRevista).London:Verso.Anonymous 1906 Informes de las comisiones mixtas peruano-brasileras encargadas del

reconocimento de los rios Alto Purús i Alto Yuruá de conformidad con el acuerdo provisional de Río de Janeiro.Lima:“LaOpiniónNacional.”

Blank,LesandJamesBogan(organizers) 1984 Burden of Dreams: Screenplay, Journals, Reviews, Photographs.

Berkeley:NorthAtlanticBooks.Chandless,William 1866 “AscentoftheRiverPurús.”Journal of the Royal Geographical

Society35:86–118.DaCunha,Euclides 1996 Obra completa: Volume 1.RiodeJaneiro:EditoraNovaAguilar.Faura-Gaig,GuillermoS. 1964 Los ríos de la Amazonía peruana: estudio histórico, geográfico, político y

militar de la Amazonía peruana y de su porvenir en el desarrollo socio-económico del Perú.Lima:ImprentadelColegioMilitarLeoncioPrado.

Fuentes,Hildebrando 1906 “Apuntesgeográficos,históricos,estadísticos,políticosisocialesde

Loreto.”InColección de leyes, decretos, resoluciones i otros documentos oficiales referentes al Departamento de Loreto.Volume16.CarlosLarrabureiCorrea,editor,pp.139–156.Lima:LaOpiniónNacional.

Ginzburg,Carlo 1992 The Cheese and the Worms: The Cosmos of a Sixteenth-Century Miller.

London:Penguin.Gow,Peter 1991 Of Mixed Blood: Kinship and History in Peruvian Amazonia.

Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress. 2001 An Amazonian Myth and its History.Oxford:OxfordUniversity

Press.Herndon,W.LewisandLardnerGibbon 1991 Exploración del valle del Amazonas.IquitosandQuito:CETA/

Abya-Yala.Latour,Bruno 1988 Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through

Society.MiltonKeynes:OpenUniversityPress.Lévi-Strauss,Claude 1966 The Savage Mind.London:WeidenfeldandNicholson.

23



294 Peter Gow

Marcoy,Paul 1875 Travels in South America from the Pacific Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean

(2Volumes).London:Blackie.OveringKaplan,Joanna 1975 The Piaroa: A People of the Orinoco Basin.Oxford:ClarendonPress.Reyna,Ernesto 1942 Fitzcarrald, el rey del caucho.Lima:P.BarrantesCastro.Seeger,Anthony 1987 Why Suyá Sing: A Musical Anthropology of an Amazonian people.

Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.ValdezLozano,Zacarías 1944 El verdadero Fitzcarrald ante la historia,Iquitos:ElOriente.ViveirosdeCastro,EduardoB. 1986 Araweté: Os deuses canibais.SãoPaulo:ANPOCS.

24



â•œpurÃºs songâ•š: nationalization and tribalization in

Documents