South American Cultures: an Interpretative Summary ^

SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION BUREAU OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY BULLETIN 143 HANDBOOK OF SOUTH AMERICAN INDIANS Julian H. Steward, Editor Volume 5 THE COMPARATIVE ETHNOLOGY OF SOUTH AMERICAN INDIANS Prepared in Cooperation With the United States Department of State as a Project of the Interdepartmental Committee on Scientific and Cultural Cooperation UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON : 1949 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C. Price $3.00 Digitalizado pelo Internet Archive. Capítulos extraídos pela Biblioteca Digital Curt Nimuendajú: http://www.etnolinguistica.org/hsai Part 4. South American Cultures: An Interpretative Summary ^ By Julian H. Steward introduction It is the purpose of the present article to provide a basis for classi- fying South American Indian cultures and to present comparative summaries of the principal cultural types in terms of their ecological adaptations and historical development. It endeavors to reduce the bewildering variety of cultural data to categories which have a real and historical meaning. In this respect, it differs from the method of historical particularizing which treats each tribe and culture as unique, emphasizing their peculiarities and stressing the exceptional rather than the general. The latter method is valuable in detailed analyses of individual tribes, but, applied to large areas, it gives the impression that cultural elements and patterns occur in a random and fortuitous manner. Admittedly, an attempt to subsume large numbers of tribal cultures under general types, as undertaken here, encounters difficulties pre- sented by borderline cases, by insufficient data, and by possible mis- interpretation of data. The general character of the main cultural types will doubtless have to be redescribed in the light of new infor- mation and more detailed comparisons, and many tribes will quite probably be found to belong to types other than those to which they are here assigned. Authors familiar with certain tribes will find that the generalizations do not do their tribes justice. Science will be best served, however, by correcting faulty generalizations with better generalizations ; carping at these constructs because a few special facts do not fit them can only lead to the impression that culture development is utterly capricious and haphazard. The fourfold classification used herein (map 18) corresponds in general to the four volumes of the Handbook—Marginal tribes, Trop- ical Forest peoples, Circum-Caribbean and Sub-Andean peoples, and Andean civilizations—except that in retrospect it is evident that many 1 1 am grateful to Drs. A. L. Kroeber, Robert H. Lowie, W. D. Strong, John M. Cooper, and Gordon R. Willey for having read and criticized this summary. 669 ; 670 SOUTH AMERICAN INDIANS [B. A. E. Bull. 143 Map 18.—Distribution of aboriginal culture types. ( Solid black, Central Andes Tropical Forest and horizontal liachure, Circum-Caribbean ; cross-hachure, Southern Andes; diagonal haehure, Semi-Marginal; stipple, Marginal.) Vol.5] SOUTH AMERICAN CULTURES STEWARD 671 tribes were improperly classified. In the preceding volumes of the Handbook, the tribes were classed more or less on the basis of impres- sions. The classification, like previous ones,^ used principally the general element content of the cultures rather than a systematic com- parison of the patterns. Special weight was accorded one or another feature in each case. The Marginal peoples were distinguished by their lack of farming and their generally simple cultures ; the Tropical For- est peoples were identified by their agriculture and various material traits, which were adapted to the tropical rain forests; the Circum- Caribbean and Sub-Andean peoples were grouped together because of their class system and temple cult; and the Andean peoples, from southern Colombia to Central Chile and Northwest Argentina, were distinguished by their Central Andean technology, material culture, and ritual complex. The present classification is based primarily on sociopolitical and religious patterns. Culture elements are accorded secondary impor- tance because too many of them are independent variables. Their distributions were dissonant with those of the sociopolitical and religious patterns, and they occurred in quite different patterns. They were the building materials of culture and did not greatly affect the architecture. The bow and atlatl, for example, occurred in widely differing patterns of hunting and warfare. Kitual elements, such as hair cutting, flagellation, or the scratching stick, served a very different purpose in each local context. Deities, such as the sun or stars, were variously mythological characters, shamans' spirits, or tribal gods. Items of adornment, such as face painting, tattooing, and ear- plugs, were badges of tribal membership, sex, society affiliation, or class status, according to the tribal patterns they entered. Even element complexes, that is, stable groups of elements, were found in different settings. For example, the initiation of boys into a secret organization, which used a sacred trumpet to represent the voice of the gods, was part of an ancestor cult in the northwest Amazon and of a priest-temple cult among the Mojo. A classification based on culture elements would not at all corre- spond to one based on sociopolitical patterns. In terms of culture elements, eastern Bolivia would be classed with the Tropical Forests, and the Northern and Southern Andes would be included with the Cen- tral Andes. The Circum-Caribbean peoples would belong with the Tropical Forests if material elements were emphasized and with the Andes if social and ritual elements were given more weight. Culture elements have greatest classifactory significance in the case of the Marginal peoples, who, though very heterogeneous, differed from all other South American tribes in certain important absences. They ^'Wissler's fivefold grouping (1922), Cooper's three-fold (1942), and Stout's nine-fold (1938). : 672 SOUTH AMERICAN INDIANS [B. A. E. Bull. 143 characteristically lacked agriculture, loom weaving, twilled and woven basketry, dugout canoes, and a considerable list of lesser items found among their neighbors. The patterns chosen herein as the basis for classification are those which integrate the institutions of the sociopolitical unit. The unit is the cohesive group whose members live in more or less permanent association with one another, participate in the same economic, social, and religious activities, and submit to the same in-group sanctions and political controls. It is the group of persons whose varied and reciprocal behavior patterns form a self-contained cultural whole. It is sometimes but not always the tribe ; the term "tribe" is often applied to a group of units which, though culturally and linguistically similar, are politically independent of one another. The magnitude of the sociopolitical unit varies : In rare cases, it is the conjugal family ; more often, it is the extended family or lineage ; frequently, it is the multi- family or multilineage community ; and, in some areas, it is the multi- community state, federation, or empire. The pattern or structure of each unit varies not only with its size and composition but with its special cleavages, which may be based variously on kinship, sex, age, and status and on military, religious, and economic activities. The units are thus distinguished by such institutions as clans, lineages, and other kin groups, division of labor, secret societies, special associations, warrior classes, a priesthood, a nobility, and the like. Though every independent sociopolitical unit differed somewhat from all others in the way it patterned these institutions, certain broad configurations occurred over wide areas, and it is possible to group them in four principal types, as follows (1) The Marginal peoples had sociopolitical units which consisted either of a single kin group or of several loosely organized kin groups. Members of the unit were differentiated on the basis of age, sex, economic activities, and sometimes associations. Behavior was sanc- tioned by the informal and often unconscious influences of tribal custom operating through these institutions. These tribes had very similar crisis rites, shamanism, and magic, and their technology and material culture, though not homogeneous, was rudimentary and generally lacked the developed agriculture, building arts, and manu- facturing processes found among other South American Indians, The sociopolitical patterns, however, varied with local conditions. Be- cause the Marginal tribes lived in areas of limited resources and had elementary exploitative devices, the size and composition of their groups and many of their institutions had to be adapted to subsistence needs. (2) The Tropical Forest and Southern Andean peoples also had sociopolitical units consisting principally of kin groups and structured Vol.5] SOUTH AMERICAN CULTURES—STEWARD 673 along lines of age, sex, and associations, but theirs differed from those of the Marginal tribes in that more developed exploitative devices, which included farming, and better transportation afforded by the canoe, permitted larger and more stable units. Social control was informal, except in a few communal activities such as warfare, which often had a special chief. They also had a richer technology and material culture, but their crisis rites and shamanistic patterns were of the same types as those of the Marginal

Load more