Notes for a History of Peruvian Social Anthropology

Notes for a History of Peruvian Social Anthropology, 1940-80 [and Comments and Reply]Author(s): Jorge P. Osterling, Hector Martinez, Tefilo Altamirano, Henry F. Dobyns, Paul L.Doughty, Benjamin S. Orlove, Henning Siverts, William W. Stein and James M. WallaceSource: Current Anthropology, Vol. 24, No. 3 (Jun., 1983), pp. 343-360Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of Wenner-Gren Foundation forAnthropological ResearchStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2742671 .Accessed: 11/09/2014 21:48

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The University of Chicago Press and Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research are collaboratingwith JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Current Anthropology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.143.23.241 on Thu, 11 Sep 2014 21:48:22 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY Vol. 24, No. 3, June 1983 ? 1983 by The Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research, all rights reserved 0011-3204/83/2403-0003$1.75

Notes for a History of Peruvian Social

Anthropology, 1940 801

by Jorge P. Osterling and Hector Martinez

THE PROFESSIONAL PHASE of the development of social anthropology in Peru begins with the institutionalization of the teaching and practice of social anthropology in Peruvian universities, a process that coincides with the efforts of non-Peru- vian anthropologists to study Peruvian society and culture. What might be called the "nonprofessional phase" of its development has been fully analyzed by Marzal (1981) and Tamayo Herrera (1980); we shall attempt to sketch the highlights of the professional phase.

The wide spectrum, necessarily descriptive, that we are presenting is the first stage of a project that will occupy us over the next few years. An effort such as this will obviously involve inadvertent omissions, the more so because the period in question was characterized by invaluable contributions in the publications of limited circulation (often mimeographed) that con-

JORGE P. OSTERLING, now an independent consultant (his mailing address: 2942 S. Columbus St., A-1, Arlington, Va. 22206, U.S.A.), formerly taught anthropology at the Pontificia Universidad Cat6lica del Per(i and social sciences at the Universidad del Paci- fico in Lima. Born in 1945, he was educated at the Seminario Conciliar de Santo Toribio (high-school teacher's degree with majors in philosophy and religion, 1967), the Pontificia Univer- sidad Cat6lica del Perfi (B.A., social sciences, 1971), and the University of California, Berkeley (Ph.D., 1977). He was a visiting scholar of the Center for Latin American Studies and Documenta- tion in Amsterdam in the winter of 1981. His publications include "Migration and Social Mobility in Peru: The Case of Juan Perez" (Kroeber Anthropological Society Papers 47-48:28-43), "The 1970 Peruvian Disaster and the Spontaneous Relocation of Some of Its Victims: Ancasino Peasant Migrants in Huayopampa" (Mass Emergencies 4:117-20), "San Agustin de Pariac: Su tradicion oral" (Debates en Antropologia 5:189-224), "La reubicaci6n de los vendedores ambulantes de Lima: eUn ejemplo de articulaci6n politica?" (America Indigena, in press), and De campesinos a pro- fesionales: Migrantes de Huayopampa en Lima (Lima: Fondo Editorial de la Universidad Cat6lica, 1980).

HkCTOR MARTfNEZ received his Ph.D. in anthropology at the Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos in 1962 and is now Associate Professor at that university. Among his major works are Las migraciones internas en el Peru (Caracas: Monte Avila, 1969); the Javier Prado Prize-winning Las migraciones altipidnicas y la colonizaci6n del Tambopata (Lima: Centro de Estudios de Poblaci6n y Desarrollo, 1969); El gxodo rural en el Peru (Lima: Centro de Estudios de Poblaci6n y Desarrollo, 1976); Migraciones internas en el Perg: Aproximaci6n critica y bibliografia (Lima: Instituto de Estudios Peruanos, 1980); and Jenaro Herrera: Una experiencia de colonizaci6n en la selva baja (Lima: Coteru, 1981).

The present paper was submitted in final form 20 Iv 82.

stituted the foundations of present-day Peruvian ethnology. Taking into account all its limitations, we have called this article "Notes....." It is simply a first step on a long and very difficult journey that we hope will be enriched by contributions and critical comments from our colleagues. In future works we will try to continue this study by analyzing the assumptions, scope, and limitations of the work dealt with here.

A number of articles dealing with social anthropology in Peru in a broader context, or specializing in certain aspects of it, have already been published, among them those of Matos Mar (1949), Trujillo Ferrari (1952), Montoya (1972-73), Millones Santa-Gadea (1973), and Arambur(u (1978). Bibliographies are in a sense also preliminary contributions to this endeavor, in particular those of Martinez, Cameo, and Ramirez (1969), Garcia Blazquez and Cordova (1969), Matos Mar and Ravines (1971), Mart'inez (1980), and Perez and Caceres (1981).

Because the development of social anthropology in Peru is strongly linked to particular institutions or projects (research or applied), we will present these institutions and projects in strict chronolog -al order.2 We will begin, however, with a brief review of the work of the scholar Luis Valcarcel, a Peruvian anthropological institution and the driving and shaping force in the building of the discipline in Peru.

VALCARCEL

If one were forced to name the single most significant force in Peruvian ethnology during the 1930s and 1940s, it would have to be the jurist, historian, journalist, politician, and ethnologist Luis Valcarcel Vizcarra. Valcarcel was born at Ilo (Moquegua) in 1891. His parents took him to Cuzco when he was a year old, and he lived there until 1930. Then, for political reasons, he moved to Lima, where he remained from then on.

The 1920s in Peru were characterized by deep reflection on the national identity and on the major structural problems facing the nation. The country was suffering the long civilian dictatorship of Augusto Leguia (1919-30) and feeling the effects of the world economic crisis. The intellectual milieu also included ideas born out of the agrarian Mexican Revolution and the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution. A series of books that have become classics in the Peruvian social sciences appeared in this

' This article was translated by Raquel E. Ciria.

2 This procedure has, however, left us no place to discuss a number of works that are landmarks in Peruvian social anthropology, among them Bourque and Warren (1981); Doughty (1968); Isbell (1974, 1976); Mangin (1967); Mayer and Bolton (1980); Nufnez del Prado Bejar (1975a, b); Smith (1971, 1975); Tschopik (1951); and Zuidema (1964).

Vol. 24 * No. 3 * June 1983 343


context (see, e.g., Castro Pozo 1924, Haya de la Torre 1927, Mariategui 1928, Garcia 1930, Basadre 1931, Belaunde 1931); Valcarcel's Tempestad en los Andes (1972 [1927]) was among them.

Tempestad en los Andes represents the principal expression of the indigenist currents of the 1910s and 1920s. In it Valcarcel maintains that, as a result of the Spanish invasion and colonization, Peru is a state shaped by two nationalities in irrecon- cilable conflict. Cuzco is the bastion of the first nationality, the mother culture; Lima is the symbol of the invading culture and the expression of an adaptation to European culture. Arguing that crossbreeding will not resolve this conflict, Valcarcel says that the only solution is a return to our Inca roots (pp. 23-25): "culture will come down again from the Andes ... the race, in the forthcoming cycle, will reappear in a dazzling form, haloed by its eternal values . . . it is the event that marks the reemer- gence of the Andean peoples on the stage of the cultures. ..." During his lengthy stay in Cuzco, Valcarcel had been drawn to the indigenist movements Tradicion and Resurgimiento (Val- derrama et al. 1979, Marzal 1981, Tord 1978) and had become one of their main spokesmen. In addition to minor works and journalistic articles he published another important piece, "Los nuevos indios" (1927), in this period.

In 1930, his support for Luis Sanchez Cerro (president 1930- 33) motivated him to go to Lima. As he explains (in conversa- tion, August 8, 1981), his opposition to the Leguia regime caused him to be called, when the regime fell, to help resolve the deep political crisis that eleven years of it had created. He was first placed in charge of the Museo Bolivariano and then, a few months later, became director of the new Museo Nacional (Decree of April 9, 1931), which he remained until 1964. The Museo Nacional was charged with "the preservation and study of all relics of Peruvian history belonging to the state," and therefore it was divided into two departments: anthropology, to study man and culture from the pre-Columbian period, and history, to deal with the later phases. The Revista del Museo Nacional appeared in 1932. Up until 1964 (vol. 33), Valcarcel was its editor, and it was and is the main forum for the best Peruvian and foreign ethnologists and archeologists. Now edited by Valcarcel's former student Rosalia Avalos de Matos, it has recently published its 44th volume. At about the same time, by a decree of April 23, 1931, the Instituto de Antro- pologia and the Instituto de Historia were created at the Uni- versidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos (UNMSM) in Lima. These institutes were to work in close collaboration with appropriate departments of the university. Thus the institutionalization of the teaching and practice of Peruvian anthropology can be traced to 1931.

Some 15 years later, when Jose Luis Bustamante y Rivero took over the presidency as leader of the Frente Democratico Nacional, Valcarcel was appointed Minister of Education. As minister, he created the Instituto de Estudios Historicos and the Instituto de Estudios Etnologicos, as components of the Museo Nacional de Historia (Supreme Decree of November 30, 1945), and the Museo de la Cultura Peruana (Supreme Decree of March 30, 1946). The Instituto de Estudios Etnologicos, first affiliated with the Museo Nacional de Arqueologia, became attached to this latter museum. At the same time, the UNMSM established its Instituto de Etnologia y Arqueologia, where Valcarcel taught until 1967. His influence in high governmental circles made it possible in 1946 for him to set in motion the Instituto Indigenista Peruano, of which he became the first director. In this period of his life he published numerous articles on popular medicine, folklore, architecture, planning, and other varied topics, an introduction to ethnology, several books on the prehistory of Peru, and Ruta cultural del Per - (1965 [1945]). Valcarcel is one of the few social scientists also conversant with the great humanistic tradition.

THE HANDBOOK OF SOUTH AMERICAN INDIANS

The publication of the seven volumes of the Handbook of South American Indians (Steward 1946-57) marked the beginning of a long and fruitful collaboration between Peruvian and foreign scholars. The goal of producing a concise summary of existing data to serve as a general reference for academic work, a text- book for students, and a guide for the common reader (Steward 1946-57, vol. 1: 2) had first been enunciated in 1932, when the National Research Council appointed a committee chaired by Robert H. Lowie of the University of California and made up of John M. Cooper and Leslie Spier to explore the possibility of producing such a work. The collective effort started at the beginning of World War II and employed more than 100 social scientists, including Peruvians Luis Valcarcel, Hildebrando Castro Pozo, and Rafael Larco Hoyle.

For us there is particular interest in volumes 2 (Andean Civilizations) and 3 (Tropical Tribes of the Forest and Savanna), edited by Julian H. Steward and the French ethnologist Alfred Metraux respectively. The two editors collaborate, in the second of these volumes, on an exhaustive analysis of tribal organizations in the Peruvian jungle. Valcarcel contributes three articles, "The Archeology of Cuzco," "The Andean Calendar," and "Indian Markets and Fairs"; Castro Pozo, then an official at the Ministry of Labor and Indian Affairs, is the author of "The Social, Political, and Economic Evolution of the Communities in Central Peru"; and Larco Hoyle, at the time director of the Larco Herrera Museum at Trujillo, offers "The Archeology of the Central Andes." The rest of the authors are American: Wendell C. Bennett (Yale University), "Introduc- tion to the Sierra Andes"; John Howland Rowe (Peabody Museum, Harvard University), "The Inca Culture at the Time of the Conquest"; George Kubler (Yale University), "The Quechuas during the Colonial Period"; Bernard Mishkin (Columbia University), "Contemporary Quechuas"; Harry Tschopik (Peabody Museum), "The Aymaras"; and Weston La Barre (Rutgers University), "The Uru-chipaya."

The arrival in Peru of these ethnologists and ethnohistorians, some of them quite young, was closely associated with the founding of the UNMSM's Instituto de Etnologia y Arqueo- logia in 1946. Valcarcel has suggested that their fieldwork sowed the seeds of modern Peruvian social anthropology. He particularly acknowledges the support of Bernard Mishkin, when the American scholar was studying the community of Kauri, near Cuzco, in the creation of that institute (Valcarcel 1947:194).

John Rowe, now at the University of California, Berkeley, was also to play an important role from 1942 onward in the organization and consolidation of the archeology and anthropology section of the Universidad Nacional San Antonio Abad in Cuzco. By 1943 John Gillin, Richard Schaedel, Harry Tschopik, Fernando Camara, and Julio de la Fuente had joined Rowe in Cuzco, and together they made that center of anthropological studies the best in the country. Oscar Nunfiez del Prado and Gabriel Escobar are outstanding students from those years. Rowe has continued his Andean studies to this day. His teaching activities have been enriched by the organization in 1960 of the Institute of Andean Studies and its journal Nawpa Pacha.

THE VIRUJ PROJECT

The Viriu Project was begun at the end of World War II under the direction of the American archeologist Gordon Willey of the Smithsonian Institution. It was the first project systematically to bring together Peruvian professors and students in ethnology and archeology. Ambitious in its scope, it involved seven American and Peruvian academic institutions. Its main purpose was to study the present-day modes of life of the inhabitants of the Virui Valley (La Libertad). Among the participants were

344 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY


Jorge C. Muelle, later a professor at the UNMSM's Instituto de Etnologia y Arqueologia; Oscar Niunez del Prado, later director of the Kuyo Chico Project; Allan Holmberg, to become the director of the Peru-Cornell Project; and Humberto Ghersi, one of the first students of the institute just mentioned. As a result of this project, several articles appeared in the Revista del Museo Nacional (and see Nufnez del Prado 1951), and Holmberg published his well-known "The Wells That Failed" (1952).

THE INSTITUTO INDIGENISTA PERUANO

The creation of the Instituto Indigenista Peruano was a consequence of the First Interamerican Indigenist Congress in Patzcuaro, Mexico, in 1940, which recommended the establishment of the Instituto Indigenista Interamericano. This institute, legally based on an international convention, was charged with coordinating and encouraging indigenist policies all over America. Contracting countries were to organize national institutes to stimulate interest in and provide information on native topics to individuals and to public or private institutions. The institutes were also to carry out studies of particular interest to each country. Their functioning, organization, and regula- tion belonged to the national jurisdictions in question.

On January 19, 1943, the Peruvian Congress, by Legislative Resolution No. 9812, approved the convention. Later, by Su- preme Resolution of May 15, 1946, it organized the Instituto Indigenista Peruano as a decentralized office of the Ministry of Justice and Labor. The institute began operating, under Val- carcel's direction, on February 21, 1947. Its functions included, among others, research on various aspects related to aboriginal populations, sponsorship of scientific research on their living conditions, collaboration with domestic and foreign institutions in the study of these topics, advice on legislation and resolutions addressed to their welfare, and the publication of a journal. It undertook a series of investigations and participated in con- crete indigenist actions both on its own and in collaboration with the Peru-Cornell Project, the Puno-Tambopata Program, and the Proyecto de Integracion y Desarrollo de la Poblacion Indigena. From 1947 until 1966, the institute's development was characterized by scarcity of human and material resources and a lack of official support. This led to its becoming part of the Ministry of Labor and Indian Affairs, a move by which it lost its independence without solving its problems. The bulk of the institute's work at this stage consisted of the publication of Perui Indigena, the implementation of studies on comunidades and haciendas, the building up of its library, and limited participation in the Vicos and Puno projects.

When the institute assumed responsibility for the research, evaluation, and training activities of the Proyecto de Integra- cion y Desarrollo de la Poblacion Indigena in 1966, it acquired sufficient funding to organize seven research groups (each com- posed of two anthropologists, an agronomist, and a social worker) spread over an equal number of "Zonas de Accion Conjunta." This, the institute's most fruitful phase, continued until 1969; then, by an article in Decree-Law 17.716, the Agrarian Reform Law, its staff became the Peasant Communi- ties Office, part of the General Office of Agrarian Reform and Rural Settlement. After a period of inactivity, the personnel of this office was scattered because the institute's director thought it was time to implement what was already known in theory. A number of the studies listed by Garcia Blazquez and Cordova (1969) date to the 1966-69 period; Martinez (1969b) describes their nature and scope. These works and others prepared at the institute contain rich ethnographic material that has so far been used only to a very limited extent. (It inspired, for example, Montoya's A proposito del car4cter predominantemente capitalista de la economia peruana actual [1970].) The journal

Osterling and Martinez: PERUVIAN SOCIAL ANTIHROPOLOGY

Perft Indigena also contains rich ethnographic material, ideas, and opinions on the so-called Peruvian native problem (see Martinez and Samaniego 1978).

At present there seem to be the beginnings of a revival of the Instituto Indigenista Peruano as a decentralized agency of the Ministry of Labor and Social Promotion.

THE PERU-CORNELL PROJECT

The Peru-Cornell Project was part of the Culture and Applied Social Science Program of Cornell University. Begun at the end of World War II, it was influenced by the experience acquired by applied anthropologists in the 1940s and by the theoretical assumptions of Malinowski's "practical anthropology" (see, e.g., 1945). It presupposed strategic intervention through action oriented towards the raising of the standard of living of econom- ically depressed populations. It was to be applied to five communities in different parts of the world: Bang Chan (Thailand), Senapur (India), Nova Scotia (Canada), the Navajo (U.S.A.), and Vicos (Ancash, Peru). Allan Holmberg was in charge of the development of the program in Peru.

Then directing the Vir(u Project and lecturing part-time at the UNMSM, Holmberg selected the Vicos hacienda, the subject of Vazquez Varela's (1952) doctoral dissertation, as a native group of very low economic status. Furthermore, the hacienda belonged to the Public Benefit Society of Huaraz and was available for rent. It was located in the Callejon de Huaylas and had a monolingual Quechua population of 2,000, spread over an area of some 7,600 hectares. It was to be the object of a series of studies and practical activities for almost two decades. The project was inaugurated in 1952, based in the Insti- tuto Indigenista Peruano, and in Holmberg's (1966:16) words it attempted: a) On the theoretical side... to conduct a form of experimental

research on modernization processes that are . .. in progress in many parts of the world;

b) On the practical side ... to help this community to change from a position of relative dependence and submission in a highly re- stricted and provincial world to a position of relative independence and freedom in the framework of Peruvian national life.

The project provided opportunities for learning and practice for several classes of students from the Instituto de Etnologia y Antropologia, UNMSM. Many of these students are still active in anthropology: Francisco Boluarte, Angelino Camargo, Victor Carrera, Hernan Castillo, Alberto Cheng, Teresa Egoa- vil, Juan Elias Flores, Humberto Ghersi, Daniel Gutierrez, Federico Kauffmann, Hector Martinez, Aida Milla, Abner Montalvo, Rodrigo Montoya, Alejandro Ortiz, Pedro Ortiz, Cesar Ramon, Arcenio Revilla, Humberto Rodriguez, Carmen Rojas, Miguel Ruiz, Eduardo Soler, Froilan Soto, Jorge Trigo, and Mario Vallejos.

Going beyond Vicos, the project also carried out research in other Andean communities. Cornell graduates were basically in charge of the operations, among them David Andrews (Paucar- tambo), Stillman Bradfield and Paul Doughty (Huaylas), Joan Snyder (Recuayhuanca), William Stein (Hualcan), John Hick- man (Chichera), Jeanette Anderson (Sayan), and Nadine Han- sen (Arequipa). Professors and students from Yale, Harvard, and Chicago also participated in the studies.

Together with Holmberg, the physician Carlos Monge Medrano, as director of the Instituto Indigenista Peruano and codirector of the project, played an important role, as did suc- cessive field directors William Mangin, William C. Blanchard, and Mario Vasquez. Henry F. Dobyns served as the project's coordinator in Peru.

Holmberg and some of his associates prepared a good intro-

Vol. 24 - No. 3 * June 1983 345


duction to the project, Vicos: Mgtodo y prdctica de antropologia aplicada (1966), and it produced articles by Dobyns (1964), Mangin (1960), Martinez (1959), and Montalvo (1957).

THE PUNO-TAMBOPATA PROGRAM

The Puno-Tambopata Program was part of the Andean Pro- gram of the United Nations and its specialized agencies (ILO, FAO, WHO, UNICEF, and UNESCO), which involved a series of communities in Bolivia, Peru, and Ecuador. It origi- nated basically in the International Labor Organization's concern with Latin American Indian problems and its acknowl- edgment that a large sector of the population remained outside existing social legislation. At ILO's regional meeting in Mon- tevideo in 1949, an Experts' Committee on Indian Labor was formed. When the experts ended their deliberations, they recommended to ILO the establishment of a joint mission to study the problem of Latin American countries with a large proportion of Indians. This was to be undertaken in consulta- tion and coordination with the UN and its specialized agencies and also with the Organization of American States.

The joint mission included experts on several areas and was presided over by the New Zealand anthropologist Ernest Beaglehole. The mission visited the various countries for a period of four months in 1952 and, after consulting with their respective governments, produced a regional plan based on individual projects for each of the countries. The plan was presented to the UN Board of Technical Assistance in 1953. It was approved in the same year and submitted for consideration to the Bolivian, Peruvian, and Ecuadorian governments.

In the Peruvian case, the plan suggested the introduction of two programs, the Puno-Tambopata (Puno) and the Muqui- yauyo (Junin)-the latter being the community studied by Adams (1959). Only the first of these was implemented. Accord- ing to Martinez and Samaniego (1978), the Puno-Tambopata Program had three phases: (a) between 1954 and 1957, experi- mentation and demonstration, under the direction and full responsibility of the Andean Program; (b) between 1957 and 1961, extension of the activities of the so-called Aymara bases of Chucuito and Cacmichachi and the Quechua base of Taraco to neighboring communities, the emphasis being on the training of members of those communities; and (c) starting in 1961, transfer of the direction and executive responsibility to Peru- vian officials and adoption of the Plan Nacional para la Inte- gracion de la Poblacion Indigena.

Social anthropologists were associated with the development of the program from its inception. Beaglehole, presiding over the joint mission, helped design the various national programs. William C. Blanchard was program director from 1956 on. Abner Montalvo served as associate director. Ra(ul Galdo studied the communities on the shores of Lake Titicaca, Hector Martinez high-plateau migrations to the Tambopata, and Pedro Ortiz the Villurcuni hacienda (see Galdo Pagaza 1962a, b; Martinez 1969a; Ortiz Vergara 1963a, b), along with topics strictly dealing with applied activities.

In spite of its theoretical and applied relevance, the Puno- Tambopata Program did not become a center for ethnological research or applied anthropology as did the Vicos and Vir(u projects, perhaps in part because it was an interdisciplinary research and applied program including agronomists, primary- school teachers, physicians, social workers, mechanics, and carpenters as well as anthropologists. A group of researchers from the Universidad Nacional Tecnica del Altiplano, with financial support from Dutch Technical Cooperation, is evaluat- ing the impact of the program. Furthermore, Jeff Rens, former Principal Adjunct Director of ILO and an advocate of the Andean Program, in collaboration with some of its participants, is writing a history of its development and reflections on what was once a program with international presence. Thus, even today, the program remains the subject of a series of discussions.

THE PLAN NACIONAL PARA LA INTEGRACION DE LA POBLACION INDIGENA

The Plan Nacional para la Integracion de la Poblacion Indigena (PNIPA), created in December 1959, was oriented towards the "integration" of the Indian population into national life, ap- plying the experience acquired in the Peru-Cornell Project and the Puno-Tambopata Program. It was strongly influenced by Mexican anthropology, mainly through the works of or direct contact with Gonzalo Aguirre Beltran, then director of the Instituto Indigenista Interamericano. It was the only project emphasizing applied anthropology in Peru that was developed with human and financial resources clearly belonging to the nation. Over a period of five years it mobilized the efforts of two provincial universities. As a public agency, PNIPA was subordinated to the Ministry of Labor and Indian Affairs. Its president was Carlos Monge Medrano. The ministry also had two other agencies dealing with indigenist activities, the Insti- tuto Indigenista Peruano and the Office of Indian Affairs, and jurisdictional problems were common.

Seeking national scope, the PNIPA organized five depart- mental programs. In practice they involved a limited number of communities, paradoxically because of limited government support. The Ancash and Puno Programs were in a sense a continuation of the Peru-Cornell Project and the Puno-Tambo- pata Program, respectively. The Ayacucho Program, limited to a series of communities in the Cangallo Pampa microregion, was the charge, both in its technical and in its administrative aspects, of the Universidad Nacional San Cristobal at Huaman- ga. The Cuzco Program was sponsored by the Universidad Nacional San Antonio Abad. Centered in the Kuyo Chico/ Pisac/Calca microregion (which included 12 communities), it prompted an interesting pilot project in applied anthropology under Oscar Nuinez del Prado's direction (see Niunez del Prado 1961). He points out (1973) that the program's main goal was to raise the Indians' consciousness with regard to the possibility of resisting the exploitative system to which they were sub- jected by the mestizo population of Pisac. The Apurimac Pro- gram was established only in PNIPA's final year. It was limited to the Uripa and Mu-napucro communities of Chincheros district, Andahuaylas, and its direction was placed in the hands of an agronomist.

The PNIPA was in a way replaced, in 1966, by the Proyecto de Integracion y Desarrollo de la Poblacion Indigena, with a U.S. $20,000,000 loan from the Inter-American Development Bank. The Consejo Nacional de Desarrollo Comunal was created to implement it. Since then, all the projects implemented in Peru have had an economicist and technological orientation. Social anthropologists have not been consulted or have played only a secondary role.

THE UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL MAYOR DE SAN MARCOS

The establishment of the Instituto de Etnologia y Arqueologfa as a section of the Facultad de Letras, UNMSM, in 1946, with Luis Valcarcel as its first director, marked the beginning of the institutionalization of social anthropology in Peru. Jorge C. Muelle (1903-74), a learned anthropologist and archeologist, was in charge of courses on anthropological theory and undertook a series of field investigations. Some of their results appeared only timidly in articles such as "Estudios etnologicos en Viriu" (1948a), "Pacarectambo: Apuntes de viaje" (1945b), "La chicha en el distrito de San Sebastian" (1945a), and "El estudio del indigena" (1948b). During the '40s Muelle worked in close coordination with the Museo de la Cultura Peruana and ethnologists from the Smithsonian Institution such as Mishkin, Holmberg, and Ozzie G. Simmons, director of the Lunahuana Project (1949-52). The first graduates of the institute were Jose Matos Mar (Tupe: Una comunidad del area del Kauke en el



Per(u, 1948), Rosalia Avalos (El ciclo vital en la comunidad de Tupe, 1950), Mario Vasquez Varela (La antropologia cultural y nuestro problema del indio, 1952), and Humberto Ghersi (Practicas funerarias en la comunidad de Vir?u, 1950). During the '50s continuity was provided by the first professors, to which Jose Matos Mar and others were added as visiting teachers. The number of students increased, and they participated in projects conceived by the institute or sponsored by international cooperation.

The Huarochiri-Yauyos Project (1953-55) was designed by the institute and sponsored by the Wenner-Gren Foundation. Among others, its participants were Jose Matos Mar, Julio Cotler, Francisco Boluarte, Teresa Guillen, and Eduardo Soler. Their theses were to become classics; most of them are included in the book Las actuales comunidades indigenas de Huarociiri en 1955 (Matos Mar 1959) and in the Revista del Museo Nacional (see Boluarte 1959, Guillen Araoz 1953, Soler 1959). Cotler's Los cambios en la propiedad, la comunidad y la familia en San Lorenzo de Quinti (1959) is also relevant.

During the '50s Hector Martinez, Abner Montalvo, and Pedro Ortiz participated first in the Peru-Cornell Project and then in the Puno-Tambopata Program. Federico Kauffmann and Ra?il Galdo, authors of a series of works related to these first experiences in applied anthropology, joined the Project and the Program respectively.

The Shantytowns Research Project, directed by Jose Matos Mar and mainly sponsored by the National Housing Corpora- tion, involved students in the institute and the English architect John Turner. The census undertaken in the context of this project and several case studies of shantytowns mark the beginnings of urban anthropology in Peru (and see the later contributions of Doughty [1970] and Uzzell [1972, 1974a, b, 1980]). William P. Mangin returned to study the mental health of the inhabitants of Lima's shantytowns in 1957-58, collabo- rating closely with Humberto Rotondo, a professor of psychiatry at the UNMSM, and of course with Matos Mar and Turner. The main product of this project was the Estudio de las barriadas limefias (Matos Mar 1966). Mildred Merino de Zela's doctoral dissertation "El cerro San Cosme: Formacion de una ba- rriada" was awarded the Javier Prado National Prize for the Promotion of Culture.

In this period the presence of Jose Maria Arguedas (1911- 69) was also important, first as a student in the institute and later as head of the Instituto de Estudios Etnologicos of the Museo Nacional de Cultura. In 1957 he earned his B.A. with the thesis "La evolucion de las comunidades indigenas," which was also awarded the Javier Prado Prize. In 1956 he published his classic article "Puquio: Una cultura en proceso de cambio." His comparative study of communities in Leon (Spain) and Peru (1963) is also worthy of mention.

An important event in this decade was the Conference on Anthropological Sciences of 1951, commemorating the quadri- centennial of the UNMSM. This was the first international anthropological meeting to be held in Peru, and it involved such renowned specialists as Luis Valcarcel, Carlos Monge Medrano, Paul Rivet, Hugo Pesce, Wendell Bennett, Pedro Weiss, Ozzie Simmons, and Maria Reiche.

Among others, the following were professors at the institute during the 1960s: Luis Valcarcel (director), Jorge Muelle, Pedro Weiss, Jehan Vellard, Pedro Villar Cordova, Jose Matos Mar, Jose Mejia Valera, and Anibal Ismodes. Others were added to or substituted for these for variable lengths of time, among them Jose Maria Arguedas, Gabriel Escobar, Julio Cotler, Luis Lumbreras, Hector Martinez, Federico Kauff- mann, Carlos Delgado, Emilio Mendizabal, Stefano Varese, and Mario Vazquez. The number of students was relatively large, and many of them are still in anthropology.

The Chancay Valley Project was conceived as a field for study and practice in the beginning of the 1960s. Under Jose Matos Mar's directorship, it involved Heraclio Bonilla, Olinda

Osterling and Martznez: PERUVIAN SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY

Celestino, Carlos Degregori, Cesar Fonseca, Fernando Fuen- zalida, Jurgen Golte, Rodrigo Montoya, Walter Quinteros, Humberto Rodriguez, Luis Soberon, Teresa Valiente, and Jose Luis Villaran, each of whom earned his/her B.A. degree with a thesis related to some aspect of this coastal microregion (see, also, e.g., Fuenzalida et al. 1968).

Special mention must be made of Emilio Mendizabal Lozack (1922-79), who, as a student and later a professor at the institute (1966-76), wrote such distinguished articles as "Pacaraos: Una comunidad en la parte alta del valle de Chancay" (1964) and "La difusion, aculturacion y reinterpretacion a trav6s de las cajas del imaginero ayacuchano" (1963-64). (The latter was awarded the Javier Prado Prize.)

The '60s were notable for the active participation of students in the institute's life. Through the Center for Anthropology Students they published Cuadernos de Antropologla, with contributions by both students and faculty.

Social anthropology at the UNMSM was influenced by the fruitful and meaningful presence of many foreign scholars as professors, researchers, or both. In chronological order, the following were important:

Ozzie G. Simmons, as a member of the Smithsonian Institu- tion's Institute of Social Anthropology, worked in Peru between 1949 and 1952. He particularly studied Lunahuana, assisted by his student Alfonso Trujillo Ferrari (at present a professor at the Free School of Sociology in Sao Paulo, Brazil). Of special importance are Simmons's articles "El uso de los conceptos de aculturacion y asimilacion en el estudio del cambio cultural en el Per(u" (1951), "The Criollo Outlook in the Mestizo Culture of Coastal Peru" (1955), and "Drinking Patterns and Interpersonal Performance in a Peruvian Mestizo Commu- nity" (1959).

Jehan Vellard, a French physician and ethnographer, taught at the institute in the '50s. He is well remembered as a keen specialist on South American ethnography and particularly on the Urus.

Jacob Fried, of McGill University, established the first links between anthropology and psychiatry through a study of migration and mental health in which professionals from the Workers' Hospital joined members of the institute. Fried's (1960) article "Enfermedad y organizacion social" is well known in Peru.

Fran?ois Bourricaud, a sociologist from the University of Bordeaux, is important for having linked anthropology and sociology in his 1956-57 courses. He also introduced to the UNMSM, among others, Karl Marx, Vilfredo Pareto, Max Weber, Marcel Mauss, Georges Gurvitch, and Robert Merton. He is better known for his work on the Peruvian bourgeoisie and the formation of the Alianza Popular Revolucionaria Ameri- cana. In our field, his Cambios en Puno: Estudios de sociologia andina (1967) is of interest. Julio Cotler and Carlos Fajardo are outstanding among his students.

Henri Favre, an anthropologist from the Institut des Hautes Etudes de l'Amerique Latine, directed the Huancavelica Project between 1963 and 1965. Products of that research were his "Algunos problemas referentes a la industria minera de Huan- cavelica" (1965) and "Evolucion y situacion de la hacienda tradicional de la region de Huancavelica" (1976 [1956]). Favre's students-Cesar Cerdan, Augusto Escribens, Fernando Fuen- zalida, Carlos Tincopa, Luis Tord Romero, Teresa Valiente, and Jose Villaran-published articles on their own findings.

Juan Comas, as a visiting professor sponsored by the OAS, taught courses on physical anthropology and American prehistory in 1962. This indicates the broad scope of the UNMSM's curriculum at the time. (Pedro Weiss had long taught the first of these courses.) Comas's critical observations on the Peru- Cornell Project and the Puno-Tambopata Program were important.

Vol. 24 - No. 3 * June 1983 347


John V. Murra has been connected with Peru since at least 1955, when he graduated from the University of Chicago. In his dissertation, recently published (1978), on the organization of the Inca state, one can find the origins of his interesting works on Andean economic and ecological complementarity, which he calls "vertical control of a maximum of ecological levels." He develops this idea in Formaciones econ6micas y politicas del mundo andino (1975), which has had wide impact on Peruvian ethnological studies. His students Cesar Fonseca and Enrique Mayer have done outstanding work on the Chaupihuaranga (Huanuco), Cafiete, and Mantaro Valleys.

William Mangin and Donald Sola, of Cornell, William W. Stein, of the University of Miami, Rolando Mellafe, of the University of Chile, and Anibal Buitron, an Ecuadorian anthropologist who was an official in ILO's regional office, were also professors at the UNMSM, for shorter periods, during the '50s and '60s, and they may not have been the only ones.

In 1969 the promulgation of the University Law generated a crisis in the UNMSM that meant the scattering of most professors in the institute and eventually Jose Matos Mar's resigna- tion as director. After a lengthy period of crisis, the institute has been reassembling its teaching staff with UNMSM graduates, some of whom have returned to Peru after postdoctoral studies abroad.

Some of its present professors are Roberto Arroyo, a former researcher of the Mantaro Valley from the Instituto Indigenista Peruano and now dedicated to urban anthropology; Blas Gutierrez, also from the IIP, in its Cuzco department, who is interested in medical anthropology and finishing postgraduate studies in France; Cesar Fonseca, another former IIP researcher, continuing his research in ecological anthropology; Hector Martinez, formerly connected with several projects of native development in Peru and now concentrating on internal migration and jungle colonization; Rodrigo Montoya, a student of the Peruvian economy, currently focusing on ideologies and poles of regional development; Oliverio Llanos, now doing graduate work in Rumania after having studied rural problems in Cajamarca and in the community of San Pedro de Casta; Roman Robles, who has studied the colonization of the Alto Huallaga by victims of the 1972 earthquake in the Callejon de Huaylas and is now researching peasant participation in the war with Chile of 1879-83; Rosina Valcarcel, who has researched the segregation of blacks in Lima and aspects of social class and ideology; and Jose Vegas Pozo, who is especially interested in Cajamarca's cooperatives. During this period the teaching of anthropology at the UNMSM has also involved Luis Millones and Alejandro Ortiz.

Emilio Choy (1915-76) was, as Alejandro Romualdo has said, "the most modest of our scholars and the wisest of our friends and teachers." Choy participated in conferences on history, ethnohistory, archeology, and anthropology and supervised many UNMSM students. Antropologia e historia (1979) gathers some of his valuable but scattered work (and see also 1955, 1960, 1966).

THE PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATOLICA DEL PERtY

In April 1953 the Seminar on Anthropology was established at the Riva Aguiero Institute under the direction of Jehan Vellard and the sponsorship of Onorio Ferrero. It represented the birth of social anthropology at the Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Per(u (PUCP). At the time Vellard was a visiting researcher at the Instituto Frances de Estudios Andinos, part of the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs. He had previously conducted research among the natives of Alto Xingui (Brazil) and Tierra del Fuego (Chile) and among the Guarani of Paraguay. He was later to become a professor in the School of Social Services and, from April 1957 through late 1962, in the Faculty of Letters of

the PUCP. In those years he also studied the Lake Titicaca Urus and the Peruvian and Bolivian Aymara.

The seminar was organized as a small circle conceiving anthropology in a broad sense as a group of sciences that requires teamwork. Its main activities were round tables, talks, and analyses of research in progress. Aida Vadillo, at the time an anthropology student at the UNMSM, played an important role, becoming the seminar assistant.

In 1957 Vellard organized the Patronato de Apoyo a la Antropologia, presided over by Jose Luis Bustamante y Rivero and including Jose Agustin de la Puente, Augusto Dammert Le6n, and Leopoldo Chiappe, among others. It became an important agency for anthropological work at the PUCP, spon- soring ethno-anthropological studies of the Yagua of the upper Amazon. Aida Vadillo was its field director, based at Pebas. Between late 1957 and August 1960 the Yagua Project collected a series of valuable data, some of which were incorporated into several articles.

At the beginning of the 1960s ethnology at the PUCP experi- enced a slight decline due to Vellard's moving to other countries in his diplomatic capacity and Aida Vadillo's being appointed General Secretary of the recently created Universidad Comunal del Centro (now Universidad Nacional del Centro del Per(u). After occupying that position from February to October 1960, Vadillo travelled to Europe for further study, returning to the PUCP only in 1964. In 1965, the university administration attempted to bring new life to the Ethnology Section of the Faculty of Letters by placing it in her hands.

Parallel activity was taking place in the Institute of Social Studies, directed by the Jesuit Father Ulpiano Lopez, and it led to the creation of a faculty of social sciences with four major fields of study (anthropology, sociology, economics, and political science) with the assistance of the Dutch Catholic universities of Tilburg and Nijmegen. In 1967 the Ethnology Section was incorporated into this faculty with the status of a department of anthropology. The Spanish paleoanthropologist Emi- liano Aguirre of the Universidad Complutense de Madrid was the department's advisor. Aguirre, who joined the university in 1968 as a visiting professor, was of the opinion that the department should offer social anthropology courses oriented towards sociocultural change and physical anthropology courses centered on the origins of Peruvian man and the diversification of American races. Mario C. Vasquez and Carlos Delgado were invited to teach social anthropology, but the idea of a section on physical anthropology was not pursued.

With Aguirre's return to Spain and the eventual resignations of Delgado, Vadillo, and Vasquez, new professors, some of whom had done their graduate work overseas, filled their places. The development of anthropology at the PUCP in the 1970s is distinguished by the diversity of its professors' theoretical and methodological orientations:

Teofilo Altamirano Rua is a graduate of the UNMSM and the University of Durham (England) and a student of British professors Bryan T. Roberts and Norman Long, in their work in the Mantaro Valley. His return to the PUCP meant the beginning of his work in urban anthropology, with a focus on regional associations (see Altamirano Rua 1980).

Carlos E. Arambur(u Lopez de Romafia, a PUCP graduate with a thesis supervised by Jorge Dandler, did graduate work at Cambridge University before obtaining a Master's degree in demography at the London School of Economics in 1976. He is engaged in intensive studies of migration (see Arambur(u 1981) and economic anthropology at the PUCP.

Alejandro Camino, another PUCP graduate, who also studied at the University of Michigan, has been interested in Amazo- nian ethnic minorities (see Camino 1977) and traditional An- dean ecology and agriculture. He is the editor of Amazonfa Persuana, a journal published by the Centro Amaz6nico de Antropologia y Aplicacion Practica.

Fernando Fuenzalida Vollmar, who studied at the UNMSM



and at the universities of Warsaw and Manchester, specializes in anthropological theory and social organization (see Fuenza- lida Vollmar 1970), while maintaining an interest in Andean beliefs (see 1965, 1979).

Manuel M. Marzal joined the department after studying anthropology with Angel Palerm at the Universidad Ibero- americana (Mexico). He is the main force behind studies on Andean religiosity (Marzal 1971, 1977) and the history of Latin American indigenism (1981).

Enrique J. Mayer graduated from the London School of Economics and did doctoral studies at Cornell University. A specialist on economic anthropology (see Mayer B. 1974) and Andean ecology, he moved to Mexico in 1978 to direct the Research Department of the Instituto Indigenista Interameri- cano and currently teaches at the University of Illinois.

Luis Millones Santa Gadea, a graduate in history of the PUCP, joined the department after graduate work at the University of Illinois at Urbana. His main interests are Andean ideology, millenarianism, and belief systems (see Millones Santa Gadea 1964).

Giovanni Mitrovic has earned Licenciado and Master's degrees at the PUCP. At present he is in the analytical stage of a study of medical diagnosis as a conversational phenomenon.

Alejandro Ortiz Rescaniere is a UNMSM graduate, a former student of Jose Maria Arguedas and Claude Levi-Strauss, and is now devoted to the structural analysis of Andean myths (see Ortiz Rescaniere 1973, 1980).

Juan Ossio Acufia, a history student of Onorio Ferrero, at- tended Oxford University, where he produced an important study on Guaman Poma's work and later received his Ph.D. His studies are on social organization and Andean symbolism and ritualism (see Ossio Acufia 1973).

Jorge P. Osterling is a graduate of the PUCP and also of the University of California, Berkeley, where he was a student of George M. Foster. He has broad interests in urban anthropology (Osterling 1980, 1981a, b).

Stefano Varese, still another PUCP graduate, taught Ama- zonian ethnology up to 1971. He was a distinguished student of Vellard and Ferrero and has produced a classic study of the Campa of the central jungle (Varese 1968; see also 1974).

Mildred Merino de Zela, mentioned earlier, has done outstanding work in the study and teaching of Peruvian folklore, mainly implemented through the Centro de Documentacion y Apoyo del Folklore Peruano, a branch of the Riva Aguiero Institute that she founded and sponsored.

THE INSTITUTO LINGtMSTICO DE VERANO

Setting aside the current criticism from some quarters and defense from others, the Instituto Linguiistico de Verano (ILV) of the University of Oklahoma is an important element in the development of ethnological research in Peru's Amazonian region and in the process of change in the numerous tribal organizations, especially in the religious sphere. The ILV's work in Peru and other Latin American countries is closely related to that of Wycliffe Bible Translators, Inc.; in general, the staff of the two organizations is the same and under a single directorship. The main task of these two organizations is collaboration with the multidenominational Protestant apostolate through translations of the Bible into as many aboriginal languages as possible. According to the ILV's founder, there are more than 3,000 different languages in the world, and more than 2,000 of them are lacking in biblical texts. This is the implicit context of the agreement signed on June 28, 1945, between the ILV (represented by William Cameron Townsend, its director) and the Peruvian government (through its Minister of Education Enrique Laroza) to "develop a cooperative program to research the native languages in the Republic, especially in the Amazo- nian jungle."

Osterling and Martinez: PERUVIAN SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY

This agreement also covered the carrying out of cooperative linguistic studies, the collection of anthropological data on herbs, dyes, etc., the study of legends, songs, and other folkloric materials, the phonographic recording of each language, the building up of photograph collections, and the preparation of articles for a journal on Peruvian anthropology to be published by the ministry. On practical matters, the ILV promised broad cooperation with all organizations interested in scientific research on tribal organizations; interpreters for educational, health, etc., officials; linguistic training for rural teachers; preparation of primers in native languages for reading and writing; translations into the native languages of useful works for the Indians; the fostering of sports, patriotism, and cooperative spirit; the eradication of "vices"; and collaboration on advanced courses in linguistics to be organized by the ministry. The ministry promised to give the ILV office space at its headquarters, to negotiate the granting of licenses for the operation of planes, and to obtain appropriate tax exemptions. The ILV began operating in April 1946 with the arrival of the first group of 18 linguists. Their numbers increased to cover a large proportion of the Amazonian native groups.

In relation to the agreement's practical aspects, or what might be called applied anthropology, in 1952 Minister of Education Juan Mendoza Alvarado conceived the Peruvian Bilingual Education System. This was a pioneer effort to achieve literacy and "incorporation" of the Amazonian natives into the Peruvian nationality in accordance with the dominant ideology of the period. Because of the scope of the task, the minister requested the ILV's collaboration. The activities developed under this system extended from 1953 to 1969. One type of program, at the community level, established more than 150 bilingual schools headed by 300 native teachers belonging to 19 ethnolinguistic groups (1969 data). A second type, in Yarina- cocha (the ILV's headquarters, near Pucallpa), dealt with the supervision of those schools and the tasks undertaken by their teachers, in collaboration with the ILV's technical staff. The ministry also organized, implemented, and annually evaluated courses for the training of teachers for literacy campaigns and adult education.

A cursory evaluation of 35 years of work by the ILV has to acknowledge some astonishing results in the area of the transla- tion of the Bible into native languages, but in the strictly academic area-linguistics and anthropology-the results have been limited. This is especially so in that the findings of the ILV's investigations and its training capabilities have not been widely shared with the Peruvian academic community. It was only in late 1979 that it published Educaci6n bilingiie: Una experiencia en la Amazonia peruana (Prado Pastor 1979), an important 520-page volume with contributions on the Jivaran, Cashivo, and Arahuaca languages, among others.

THE INSTITUTO DE ESTUDIOS PERUANOS

The Instituto de Estudios Peruanos (IEP) was founded in 1964 after a working meeting at Huampani. It was chaired by then Minister of Education Francisco Miro Quesada, and included, among others, Valcarcel, Arguedas, Matos Mar, and Maria Rostworowski. In due time the IEP became one of the most important private institutions concerned with issues in the social sciences.

Luis Pasara, in his article "Politica y ciencias sociales en el Percu" (1978), presents several interesting hypotheses about the IEP's founding. He suggests that some of the founding members had played a very active role in the Movimiento Social Progresista in the 1950s and that a few of them had even become a kind of weekly study group. Among others, this group is said to have included Valcarcel, Matos Mar, Jorge

Vol. 24 - No. 3 * June 1983


Basadre, Jorge Bravo Bresani, and the brothers Augusto and Sebastian Salazar Bondy. Be that as it may, the IEP was established during Fernando Bela(unde Terry's first government (1963-68), when several of its members held important posts in universities and public administration.

The IEP developed out of the UNMSM research project earlier mentioned on the Chancay Valley microregion, which was directed by Matos Mar under an agreement with the New York State School of Industrial and Labor RelatiQns at Cornell University signed by William F. Whyte and Lawrence K. Williams. In 1967 the IEP began publishing the results of this research, along with earlier investigations by scholars such as Henri Favre. Another important element in the IEP's development was the support given it by a number of Peruvianists in the United States and Europe, together with its association with such foreign professors as Murra, Bourricaud, Favre, and Frangois Perroux. Equally important was its organization, almost singlehanded, of the 1970 XXXIX International Con- gress of Americanists in Lima.

Strongly influenced by Perroux, the IEP frequently organized round tables in which members or invited scholars presented progress reports or research results, many of them in mimeographed form. Besides developing original research, it is undoubtedly Peru's most important publisher, in both the number and the selection of titles. Its director, Jose Matos Mar, not only has provided it enthusiasm and dedication, but also has been influential in getting financial support from a number of foreign institutions and foundations.

The IEP has managed to develop a core made up of an interdisciplinary group of professionals with degrees in social anthropology. Some of these have become specialists in other areas. For example, Heraclio Bonilla is a specialist in economic history and the author of El minero en los Andes (1974), one of the few anthropological studies on the topic; Julio Cotler is one of the best-known political scientists in Peru and the author of Clases, estado y naci6n en el Pers (1978); and Carlos Ivan Degregori is a political analyst and chief editorialist of El Diario de Marka.

NEW CENTERS FOR SOCIAL RESEARCH

During the 1970s there was constant creation of centers for social research. In Peru as a whole, it is estimated that there are now more than 100 of these centers. Basically, they are small groups of a fundamentally interdisciplinary nature-anthropologists and sociologists at work on problem solving with regard to the main social issues of the country. Only a few examples can be given here. The Centro Amazonico de Antro- pologia y Aplicacion Practica (CAAAP) and the Centro de Investigaci6n y Promocion Amazonica (CIPA) are the two main centers dealing with ethnic minorities in Peruvian Amazonia. The first, already mentioned, publishes the best local journal in the field, Amazonia Peruana. It has also published valuable studies predominantly of an ethnographic and ethnohistorical nature. CIPA was founded in 1977, and its board of directors is devoted to counselling the Amazonian population on obtaining title to its lands. More recently, it has begun to publish a series of studies on ecological, legal, ethnic, and health problems in native communities (see, e.g., Chirif 1979). In the area of Andean studies, the more important centers are the Instituto de Pastoral Andina, with its journals Allpanchis Phuturinga and Pastoral Andina; the Centro de Estudios Rurales Andinos "Bartolome de las Casas," which has published valuable volumes on Andean oral tradition as well as autobiographical testimonies; and the Instituto de Estudios Sociales, which publishes another local classic, the journal Critica Andina. All these research centers have incorporated into their staffs young professionals who combine research tasks with advising communities on their main legal and human- rights problems.

THE SITUATION TODAY

It is quite out of the question to summarize in a few pages what has happened in Peruvian social anthropology during the last 40 years. This is even more so in view of the fact that at present 7 of Peru's 35 universities grant higher degrees in anthropology: the Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos (Lima), the Universidad Nacional San Antonio Abad (Cuzco), the Univer- sidad Nacional de San Cristobal de Huamanga (Ayacucho), the Universidad Nacional de Trujillo (Trujillo), the Universidad Nacional del Centro (Huancayo), the Universidad Nacional de San Agustin (Arequipa), and the Pontificia Universidad Cato- lica del Per(u (Lima). The Baccalaureate in Anthropology is granted by all universities, which also award the professional degree of Licenciado in anthropology (of which an estimated 50 have so far been awarded). The Master's degree in anthropology is granted only by the Academic Program of Higher Studies of the PUCP (since 1972, only 16 have been awarded). Doctoral studies were suspended by the military government in the early '70s, but some 25 Peruvian anthropologists had already been awarded that degree in the country before the suspension, and others have since received it from U.S. and European universities.

At present there is the prospect of a new stage of high academic productivity in Peruvian anthropology. An increasing number of professional journals and specialized books are being published in Peru. All this is taking place after a period of critical stagnation generated by the University Law of 1969, which compounded one of the worst crises on record in Peruvian universities. Many young anthropologists have begun to return to Peru after periods of higher training in important foreign graduate schools to enrich students with their knowledge.

Comments by TEOFILo ALTAMIRANO

Departamento de Ciencias Sociales, Pontificia Universidad Cat6lica del Pers, Lima, Peru. 16 xi 82

This article is a well-organized introduction to Peruvian social anthropology, accurately summarizing the major stages of its development and the names, dates, and work of the people involved in it. However, perhaps for lack of information on what has been done at the provincial level, it overemphasizes the work of Lima-based anthropologists; more could be said on anthropological work in provincial universities.

by HENRY F. DOBYNS Center for the History of the American Indian, The Newberry Library, Chicago, Ill. 60610, U.S.A. 9 XII 82

Osterling and Martinez correctly write that it is very difficult to summarize briefly 40 years of Peruvian social anthropology. It is equally difficult to comment or augment significantly their outline in 500 words.

One important omission is that Luis Valcarcel installed Abraham Guillen M. as National Museum photographer. There, and from his own studio, Guillen created a major visual anthropology of Peru years before John Collier, Jr., labeled this genre (Dobyns and Guillen 1970).

A primary reality of Peruvian social anthropology not mentioned is Native Andean American high-altitude adaptation. One cannot accurately comprehend Andean social behavior without understanding that native populations are adapted genetically to an oxygen-short environment. Carlos Monge Medrano (1948, 1949) discovered this biological reality and long directed the research institute studying the phenomenon.

Discussing Valcarcel and nonacademic projects, the authors imply a fundamental characteristic of Peruvian social anthro-



pology. Foreign and government support significantly developed it. Social anthropologists and their findings have, moreover, influenced governmental policies and programs.

After the armed forces seized power in October 1968, General- President Juan Velasco A. recruited Carlos Delgado 0. (1969) as principal speech writer. The National Planning Institute paid his salary. Long secretary to the American Popular Revo- lutionary Alliance party's leader, Delgado had studied anthropology at Cornell University. Less than a year later, the regime recruited Mario C. Vazquez V. as the second highest official of the Agriculture Ministry's General Bureau of Agrarian Reform. Thus, lessons social scientists learned at Vicos and elsewhere influenced programs the military regime imposed. Guiding action with policy science research, Vazquez assembled the largest Peruvian social science research unit yet-approximately 90 individuals trained in various disciplines.

Two decades earlier, Monge assumed the presidency of the Instituto Indigenista Peruano and converted that paper tiger into a precedent-setting action agency. He contracted with Cornell University (Cornell Peru Project), the International Labor Organization (Puno-Tambopata Project), Cuzco Uni- versity (Kuyo Chico Project), and the University of Huamanga (Pampas de Cangallo Project). Thus, Monge sowed the seeds that produced a bumper crop of government-sponsored social anthropological research.

How a United States university became committed to Peru- vian policy research and action deserves some explanation. Leonard H. Cottrell, R. Lauriston Sharp, and Alexander H. Leighton conceived a long-range comparative study of culture change and obtained Carnegie Corporation of New York funding. They recruited Allan R. Holmberg to join Cornell's faculty and direct Peruvian research. Study participants did not pre- suppose strategic intervention. They learned during their overseas investigations how to intervene strategically and foster cultural change (Dobyns et al. 1967). Monge, Holmberg, and Vazquez originally anticipated studying changes rural electri- fication would generate. They established the Cornell Peru Project (CPP) and intervened only after a deglaciation flood washed away the hydroelectric dam (Holmberg and Dobyns 1969).

CPP personnel carried out phased studies outside Vicos reflecting increasing anthropological knowledge about Peruvian society. Many more were published than Osterling and Mar- tinez indicate. Ghersi B. (1959-61) conducted a baseline study of a mestizo trading village, while Vazquez (1952) first analyzed Vicos, stimulating imitative intergroup relations analyses. Then Snyder (1957) studied the Recuayhuanca Indigenous Com- munity and Stein (1961) the half-hacienda, half-autonomous Hualcan hamlet, while Holmberg, Vazquez, and others intervened in Vicos.

Another Carnegie Corporation of New York grant in 1959 funded studies of different community types and other regions: a political district without haciendas (Doughty and Doughty 1968), an Aymara-speaking zone near Lake Titicaca (Hickman 1975), an eastern-slope colonizing population (Andrews 1963), migrants to the coastal steel mill/port of Chimbote and to Lima (Bradfield 1963), squatters in urban Arequipa (Rund 1966), and rural education throughout the intermontane Calle- jon de Huaylas (Vazquez 1965). Additional funding supported Cornell sociologist J. M. Stycos's study of Peruvian fertility, with Cara E. Richards (1963) in Lima supervising interviewers studying at the National School of Social Work. Institutionally, a CPP research coordinator with a Ministry of Labor and Indian Affairs office in Lima superseded the Vicos field director. Dobyns (1964, 1966, 1970) served in 1960-62. Organizing a 1961 symposium, Dobyns and Vazquez (1963) stimulated anthropological and other research on internal migration, probably the most important domestic phenomenon of this century.

The U.S. Peace Corps asked Cornell University anthropologists to evaluate the achievements of its first volunteers in


Peru. The CPP staff measured success in terms of institutional change (Dobyns, Doughty, and Holmberg 1965). This meant studying numerous communities. Peruvian provincial university anthropology student teams led by a staff Ph D. or experi- enced national investigator analyzed eastern-slope Paucartambo (Andrews et al. 1965), western-slope stock-growing Pararin (Doughty and Negron 1964), Mantaro Valley progressive Chaquicocha (Castillo et al. 1964), and decaying Mito (Castil- lo et al. 1964), measuring institutional changes in many valley communities (Maynard 1964) and describing an upper Callejon de Huaylas disintegrating farm village (Castillo et al. 1964). A bonus volunteer-written study described Ticaco, a western- slope Aymara colony (Korb 1965). Doughty (1964, 1972, 1976) became CPP Lima research coordinator in 1962-64, beginning studies that materially advanced scientific understanding of the primate-city roles that migrants play.

The U.S. Agency for International Development contracted with Cornell for a regional rural development demonstration effort. Maynard (1965) headed the Ecuador team working with the Institute of Agrarian Reform and Colonization. Paul H. Ezell (1966) led the Bolivia team working with the Indian Institute and COMIBOL until Vazquez moved there. Susan Bourque (Bourque et al. 1967) led the Peru team studying the development potential of one western-slope district. Then rural sociologist Earl W. Morris (1968) led the CPP during a study of simultaneous action and research in a western-slope mixed- farming village constructing its farm-market access road.

The binational CPP terminated in 1966. USAID funding ended. Holmberg died in October. The twice-extended 1952 accord lapsed. Vazquez's (1967) 370-title bibliography of Peruvian social science English-language publications showed the massive CPP contribution. Dobyns, Doughty, and Lasswell (1971) edited a general summary of strategic Vicos interven- tions and their consequences. Himes (1981) wrote a critical analysis of the Vicos experiment.

United States university demand for professors placed former CPP personnel possessing first-hand experience with the real Andean social world in numerous institutions. Middlebury College has Andrews, Smith College Bourque, the University of Florida Doughty, San Diego State University Ezell, Rhode Island College Maynard, Iowa State University Morris, Syra- cuse University William P. Mangin, Stanford University Clif- ford R. Barnett. Delgado died working for UNICEF. FAO sent Vazquez to Honduras as an agrarian reform consultant.

by PAUL L. DOUGHTY Anthropology Department, University of Florida, 1350 GPA, Gainesville, Fla. 32611, U.S.A. 14 xii 82

Osterling and Martinez have taken an important initiative by beginning an examination of the development of modern Peru- vian sociocultural anthropology, a task obscured by popular fascination with Andean prehistory. ("Somewhere in the world once a month," a colleague once remarked, "a book is published on the Incas!") This concise and evenhanded summary from a Peruvian point of view makes a significant contribution to modern anthropology by aiding all of us to place our interests in national, historical, theoretical, and methodological contexts (Doughty 1977). The authors do not, perhaps rightly, attempt any critical analysis of the developments they describe. Their effort is more an "ethnohistory" of the subject, a contribution to understanding the recent international growth of anthropology. In the case of Peru, anthropology has changed radically from its early beginnings and even from its state only 20 years ago.

Through the early 1960s, the relatively small number of Andean scholars worked in a "gemeinschaft" atmosphere which included persons from all the anthropological fields, something

Vol. 24 - No. 3 . June 1983 351


which is no longer true by and large. The Peruvian anthropologists at that time could still largely be found at San Marcos University, the Peruvian Indian Institute, or one of the three Lima museums. Oscar Nufinez del Prado and his colleagues held forth in Cuzco, the other pole of anthropological concentration. For foreigners, there was a "clubhouse" of sorts, the Pension Morris, located in Bre-na, near downtown Lima. It was a gra- cious and crumbly old mansion which reportedly had been Max Uhle's home, where Kroeber may have stayed.

The two-storey adobe building (bulldozed away in 1969), with ample surrounding porches, was centered on a hectare-sized lot above whose walls towered some very tall palm trees. Behind the house was the semblance of a lawn on which one might sit in a sturdy garden chair while observing animated games of "sapo" played by guests at siesta time. This establishment on Orbegoso Street was reigned over by the aging and marvelously opinionated English-Peruvian Nora Bryson de Andrade, her daughter, and a star boarder. In the living room, beneath the encircling balcony, the well-worn overstuffed furniture was normally weighed down by a good sample of transitory North American and (occasionally) European anthropologists and their student proteges, particularly in the months from June to September. It was here, with proper references from my mentor, Allan Holmberg, that my wife and I were first given rooms in Lima.

Old Lima: High ceilings, old leather furniture, ingenious Victorian plumbing, stiff servants serving stiff pisco sours, and, above all, anthropological tales of Peru, anthropological gossip, and people you wanted to meet. In 1960, the Pension Morris was the place where a newcomer could be "properly" initiated into Peruvian studies in the semimodern comfort of Max Uhle's legacy. Archaeologists covered the porches with potsherds, and various unseen persons regularly left dusty niches filled with sleeping bags and other equipment to await their return, some- day. Occasionally Peruvian colleagues were invited in for cock- tails and dinner at this formidable "gringo" establishment, an adventure if not a culinary treat. I always had the feeling that they trod observantly and with caution (did they make notes later?).

This "clubby," elite-intellectual atmosphere was already doomed. Dozens of new scholars were on the scene, and more seemed to appear daily. "Who are all these people?" asked John Murra at a mid-1960s anthropology meeting of those who now crowded into the Andean sessions to hear him talk on "verti- cality" and cultural ecology.

Just how recent these developments have been is made clear by examination of the landmark Handbook of South American Indians (Steward 1946-57). Here we discover that all of the material in it on the central Andes was written by just 15 persons. Noted Steward in the preface (p. xxvi): "not over half a dozen such studies [ethnological] have been made heretofore ... despite the practical as well as scientific importance of understanding modern Indians." At that time, the total number of Andeanists of all kinds did not exceed 45, and of these probably half were truly active. The 1938 Directory of Anthropologists recorded 20 Peruvian specialists (Tax 1975). The Handbook's articles on sociocultural matters were written by Mishkin, Valcarcel, Castro Pozo, Tschopik, and LaBarre and cited only 40 contemporary works among them. Mishkin's summary of contemporary Quechua culture, which stood for years as the standard English reference, was little more than a single community study in which he made reference to but eight other contemporary works. Today a review article on Quechua and Andean life would be a staggering task.

The origins of the modern growth in Peruvian studies lie, as the writers point out, in Lufs Valcarcel's multifaceted con- cerns: ethnohistorical, Indianist, applied-political, and ethnographic. It subsequently received its principal stimulus from a series of externally funded, cooperative institutional projects: the Virui Valley studies (1947), the Cornell Peru Project (1951-

66), the UN and U.S. foreign-assistance-funded programs in southern Peru (1959), and others mentioned here. What is interesting in these developments is the special influence of particular individuals, such as Valcarcel, Holmberg, Rowe, Muelle, Schaedel, Vazquez, Murra, Matos, and Whyte. For example, some 30% of all the cultural anthropologists working in Peru at the time of Holmberg's death in 1966 had been trained or sponsored by him.

According to my conservative estimates (gathered from acquaintanceship, the AAA Guide to Departments, bibliographies, and the like), there are about 145 sociocultural anthropologists with U.S. university doctorates specializing in Peru- vian research. Of these, over 85% received their doctoral degrees after 1960. The same is no doubt true of Peruvian and European professionals as well. I cannot estimate the present number of the latter. While in 1947 there were about 20 Peru- vian professional anthropologists of all kinds, today Osterling and Martinez estimate that there are approximately 91 in the sociocultural field alone.

This explosion of interest has obviously led to an ever increasing expansion of research topics. In contrast to the status of research in 1944, when the Handbook was written, today bib- liographic references indicate that over 600 different places have been studied at least once by social anthropologists and some 65 full ethnographic descriptions of communities and regions have been published, although few are readily available. The quantity of journal articles is vast.

The authors mention the Inter-American Development Bank program that replaced the PNIPA in 1966. This program, despite its budgeting of about $1,000,000 for research and its em- ployment of some 26 Peruvian anthropologists for almost three years, squandered its opportunity. The anthropologists could hardly be blamed for this failure, because the lawyer who directed the program denigrated the value of any social science input. Anthropologists and others were employed only because it was required by the IDB (personal communication, Frank Griffiths). A further disappointment was the decision to "clas- sify" all of the research and thus limit its distribution, even though some 63 reports were issued (Martinez et al. 1968: 494-521).

These changes in Peruvian studies have had major repercus- sions on the circulation of professional information. No am- bience like the old Pension Morris exists. The Instituto de Estudios Peruanos formalized that role for many social scientists. The IEP, however, has also been engulfed by the growth of the disciplines. Despite the increase in Peruvian journals and other publications such as those of the IEP, these works still struggle for widespread readership and support beyond im- mediate "Peruvianist" circles and networks.

In contrast to U.S. and European anthropologists, Peruvian colleagues have not been united in effective professional organizations to which most belong. There have been attempts to form such organizations from time to time. In 1966-67, for example, the Asociacion Peruana de Antropologos included virtually all Peruvian social scientists and had regional affili- ates in Ayacucho, Cuzco, and Huancayo. This organization, aided by the newly emergent government organization La Casa de la Cultura, elected Mario Vazquez Varela its first president, with the aging Luis Valcarcel as honorary president. Its initial enthusiasm resulted in an impressive three-day meeting, with 53 papers on internal migration and social stratification in Peru and the publication of an excellent annotated bibliography (Vazquez 1967). Within a year or so, unfortunately, the organization faltered. Since then there have been other national meetings in Peru, under different sponsorship, at irregular intervals.

In consequence of the growth of institutions and numbers of anthropologists, community life, squatter settlements, and migration have been extensively researched, llama trains fol- lowed to their trail's end, sex-role studies begun, and Andean



cultural ecology examined. Nevertheless, substantial lacunae still exist, and comparative syntheses are missing. Peruvian anthropology, like its international counterparts, has both benefited and suffered from its rapid growth, spun off in pat- terned reflection of the past, like so many lineages with their founding patriarchs. The great anthropological classic, the Handbook of South American Indians, requires a contemporary successor to summarize and provide new orientation to a complex field which is increasingly enriched by new contributions now scattered throughout publications on four continents.

by BENJAMIN S. ORLOVE Division of Environmental Studies and Department of Anthro- pology, University of California, Davis, Calif. 95616, U.S.A. 20 xi 82

The authors have chosen to give their article a limited scope. They examine the "professional phase of the development of social anthropology in Peru," which, they state, "begins with the institutionalization of the teaching and practice of social anthropology in Peruvian universities." From their description, Peruvian anthropology has continued to develop by expanding and by moving into other, closely related contexts, particularly museums, research institutes, and national and international development projects. The effort of the authors seems to be directed at compiling as complete as possible a list of the names of anthropologists, research sites, and institutions which support research. This task is a useful one and offers interesting details of the intellectual biographies of some anthropologists. Given this aim and the brevity a journal article imposes, the authors have had to treat some themes, such as the topics of research, very briefly and entirely omit others, such as theoretical orientations.

This article gives the impression that the main characteristic of Peruvian anthropology has been undifferentiated growth. The names of new students and professors, research sites and universities are added to the list, but anthropology does not appear to change qualitatively over time. The article does not present the debates within Peruvian anthropology which give it much of its vitality.

These debates, however, are not solely of an academic sort, such as those that might characterize biochemistry or astro- physics. Peruvian anthropology is intimately linked to Peru- vian society, and debates tend to reflect conflict within Peru- between classes, ethnic categories, regions, political parties, interest groups-and concern over the relations between Peru and a wider international order. Many Peruvian anthropologists view the position of the intellectual in society as a complex and often ambiguous one; they are often conscious of the mul- tiple implications of research in intellectual and other circles (Alberti and Mayer 1974).

This article has chosen not to address these questions directly, although it does suggest that Peruvian anthropology has passed from its "pre-professional" origins to a "professional" stage, marked by scholars who participate as academics or as experts in projects and institutes. Brief mention is made of a few social action projects; more extensive treatment is given to mis- sionaries and programs deemed worthy of funding by government ministries and international agencies.

It is difficult, however, to separate the presence of Indians and peasants as an object of discussion in the classroom and the office from their presence as subjects of social, political, and economic action. The agrarian reform of 1969, language policy, educational reform, the increasing pressure of urban squatter settlements all reflect this latter sort of presence (Salomon 1982). They encouraged the expansion of Peruvian anthropology, providing empirical topics of study, suggesting theoretical orientations, influencing the roles anthropologists could play.

In other words, an intellectual history of Peruvian anthropology is weakened if it is not also a social history. The authors


indicate their concern to carry their initial efforts forward. This task will require not only the enlargement they propose of the bibliography, but an expansion of the questions they ask.

by HENNING SIVERTS Museum of Culture History, Department of Anthropology, University of Bergen, J. Frieles gt. 3, N-5000 Bergen, Norway. 15 xi 82

The title of this paper indicates to me an exposition of the intellectual development of Peruvian social anthropology. My expectations have not been fulfilled. Instead of a presentation of theoretical and methodological trends, we meet a list of names and dates. In lieu of a thematic or regional focus we are offered an array of projects and institutions.

It is symptomatic that "the professional phase of the development of social anthropology in Peru begins with the institutionalization [my emphasis] of the teaching and practice of social anthropology in Peruvian universities. . . ." And since a "nonprofessional phase" of anthropology apparently has been noticed and described, we are anxious to learn what the con- trasting "highlights" of the professional phase are supposed to be. After having read this paper I am still confused, and I would not be able to tell the difference between the two phases, unless participation of foreign anthropologists and the injection of capital from abroad are considered (by the authors) a sufficient condition and a satisfactory description of professionali- zation.

Apart from these shortcomings-in my view, that is-I find it rather maladroit of the authors, in their endless name-drop- ping, to omit a number of the anthropologists (mostly professional), Peruvian and foreign alike, who have done substantial research in the Montania during the last decade, such as Brent Berlin, Elois Ann Berlin, John Bodley, Michael F. Brown, William M. Denevan, Andres Ferrero, Rafael Girard, Jose M. Guallart, Marlene Dobkin de Rios, Eric Barry Ross, Janet Siskind, Henning Siverts, and Luis M. Uriarte, to mention only a few.

Boring as this paper is, it does nevertheless contain a section on the powerful position and impact of the Summer Institute of Linguistics, which, relevant or not to the subject at hand, is revealing in itself. The list of references may possibly convey part of the missing information by reflecting some of the interests and ideas preoccupying some anthropologists working in Peru.

by WILLIAM W. STEIN Department of Anthropology, State University of New York at Bufalo, Amherst, N.Y. 14261, U.S.A. 1 XII 82

The authors have done splendidly in tracing the growth of social anthropology in Peru. This development has contributed greatly to Peruvians' positive self-evaluation and striving for self-deter- mination under conditions of imperialist domination. I have no criticism of their "first step," but, rather, eagerly await future works expanding and elaborating on the outline presented here.

My general comment is to indicate my profound respect, appreciation, and admiration for the high quality of Peruvian Peruvianist work, which has been of great utility to me. It is all the more praiseworthy considering Peru's relative poverty in consequence of the country's decapitalization by foreign interests. For example, Anaya Franco (1979:29), utilizing figures from the U.S. Department of Commerce, shows how a net U.S. investment in Peru of $371,000,000 between 1950 and 1971 generated a profit of $1,691,000,000, of which $1,162,000,000 left Peru for the United States (for every entering dollar, $4.50 left the country), and Stepan (1978:287) projects a current Peruvian foreign debt service of well over half the value of the

Vol. 24 * No. 3 * June 1983 353


country's exports. Under such conditions, research support and other scholarly resources are scarce, and it is truly marvelous how Peruvian researchers extend their small share through collective endeavors and the exchange of scholarly substance. This is not to deny that some scholarly empires exist and that economic marginality creates some lumpen-scholars (i.e., those with no access to the means of intellectual production), but I rather think I am acquainted with a greater number of better- remunerated nonproducers and producers of expensive but useless material where I currently work than in Peru.

Second, since the authors generously make reference to some of my Peruvian work, I provide here a comment on my 31 years in this activity which might be called, to paraphrase the subtitle of Mangin's (1979) recent self-reflection, "Peruvian Studies and Me." If Peruvian works have been useful to me, it would not seem that I have returned equal utility to Peru. Regrettably, a great part of my own production has been directed toward North American, rather than Peruvian, colleagues and students. This is not simply a consequence of my early striving for professional status and rewards, an under- achievement that hardly distinguishes me from hordes of other common academicians, but involves greater inabilities. My work on Hualcan (Stein 1961), referred to in

Notes for a History of Peruvian Social Anthropology

Documents

Transcript of Notes for a History of Peruvian Social Anthropology