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. Wallace
Source: Current Anthropology, Vol. 24, No. 3 (Jun., 1983), pp. 343-360
Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of Wenner-Gren Foundation for
Anthropological Research
Stable 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 of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
The University of Chicago Press and Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research are collaborating
with 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 PM
All 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 anthro-
pology in Peru begins with the institutionalization of the
teaching and practice of social anthropology in Peruvian uni-
versities, 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 devel-
opment 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 ques-
tion was characterized by invaluable contributions in the publi-
cations 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 in-
cluded ideas born out of the agrarian Mexican Revolution and
the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution. A series of books that have be-
come 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 coloni-
zation, 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 appro-
priate departments of the university. Thus the institutional-
ization 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 particu-
larly 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 anthro-
pology 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 anthro-
pological 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 teach-
ing 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 con-
sequence of the First Interamerican Indigenist Congress in
Patzcuaro, Mexico, in 1940, which recommended the establish-
ment of the Instituto Indigenista Interamericano. This insti-
tute, legally based on an international convention, was charged
with coordinating and encouraging indigenist policies all over
America. Contracting countries were to organize national insti-
tutes 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 partic-
ipation 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 ex-
ample, 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 com-
munities 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 sub-
ject 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 de-
cades. 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 dis-
trict, 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 implement-
ed in Peru have had an economicist and technological orienta-
tion. 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 under-
took a series of field investigations. Some of their results ap-
peared 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 eth-
nologists 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 partici-
pated 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 psychia-
try 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 insti-
tute (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 con-
tributions 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 be-
tween 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 mi-
gration 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 pre-
history 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 an-
thropologist 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 profes-
sors 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 gradu-
ates, 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 re-
searcher, 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 re-
searched 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 re-
search 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 an-
thropology 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 politi-
cal science) with the assistance of the Dutch Catholic univer-
sities of Tilburg and Nijmegen. In 1967 the Ethnology Section
was incorporated into this faculty with the status of a depart-
ment 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 depart-
ment should offer social anthropology courses oriented towards
sociocultural change and physical anthropology courses cen-
tered 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 anthro-
pology (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 out-
standing 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 director-
ship. 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 re-
search 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 co-
operative spirit; the eradication of "vices"; and collaboration
on advanced courses in linguistics to be organized by the min-
istry. 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 mem-
bers 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 govern-
ment (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 develop-
ment 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 orga-
nized round tables in which members or invited scholars pre-
sented 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 inter-
disciplinary group of professionals with degrees in social anthro-
pology. 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-anthro-
pologists 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 pub-
lished 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 univer-
sities.
At present there is the prospect of a new stage of high aca-
demic 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 men-
tioned 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 anthro-
pology 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-approxi-
mately 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 fund-
ing. 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 over-
seas 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 inter-
vened 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 an-
thropological and other research on internal migration, probably
the most important domestic phenomenon of this century.
The U.S. Peace Corps asked Cornell University anthropolo-
gists 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 univer-
sity 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 con-
texts (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 contri-
bution 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 anthropolo-
gists 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 ma-
terial 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 ... de-
spite the practical as well as scientific importance of under-
standing 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 com-
munity 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 ethno-
graphic. 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 in-
teresting 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, bibliogra-
phies, and the like), there are about 145 sociocultural anthro-
pologists 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 increas-
ing 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, de-
spite 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 di-
rected 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 scien-
tists. 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 orga-
nizations 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 orga-
nization 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 com-
plex 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 sup-
port 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 theoreti-
cal 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 anthropolo-
gists 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 govern-
ment 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 anthropolo-
gy, providing empirical topics of study, suggesting theoretical
orientations, influencing the roles anthropologists could play.
In other words, an intellectual history of Peruvian anthro-
pology 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 develop-
ment of social anthropology in Peru begins with the institu-
tionalization [my emphasis] of the teaching and practice of social
anthropology in Peruvian universities. . . ." And since a "non-
professional 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 suffi-
cient 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 profes-
sional), 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 inter-
ests 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 inter-
ests. 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, col-
leagues 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 the article, has
had, as far as I perceive it, rather little impact on Peruvian
social anthropology. This may be just as well: when I arrived
in Peru in 1951, I was a young ignoramus in search of an exotic
field experience with "the Indians." It was a rude shock to dis-
cover that the term "Indian" was employed as social abuse, not
as an ethnic label, and that Peruvian countrypeople constituted
the poorest and most powerless class in what I later called a
"servile social order" (Stein 1981:9-12). The term is "mis-
leading" (Pearse 1975:60); and, certainly, it misled me. I had
not been trained to examine the social relations of production
(nor had my teachers), and so I absorbed the viewpoint of the
dominant class: I confused ideology with reality and made the
gross error of blaming the victims of oppression and exploita-
tion for their condition. I applied terms like "passivity," "psy-
chic masochism," and "underachievement," failing to grasp
what Porshnev (1978:139) calls the "historical changeability
of the character and traits of an ethnos." Later, of course, I
managed to discover that Peruvian countrypeople have demon-
strated on numerous occasions a vigorous opposition to their
oppressors (see Stein 1982). Meanwhile, in consequence of my
tendency to view the world from a metaphysical closet, and my
lumpen condition at the time as an academic hack, when I
arrived in Lima in 1959 with a Fulbright lectureship I was not
at all prepared to aid the development of Peruvian social anthro-
pology. My students' awareness of reality was so much greater
than my own that our roles should have been reversed. (I
belonged in the "transicion" [preparation for first grade in
Peruvian schools] to political economy.)
I suggest, therefore-and this applies equally well to other
North American scholarship that may be indigestible in Peru-
that what I chauvinistically saw as "aid" was, rather, to para-
phrase another title (that of the work of Lapp6, Collins, and
Kinley [1980], which demonstrates how the international "aid
establishment" allies itself with imperialistic designs and pur-
poses), an "obstacle" to Peruvian scholarly development. Thus
it is entirely possible that Peruvians ignore some research
results, of which I only cite my own, not because of their
"arribismo," "fierce and malicious tactics of competition," and
"more subtle tendencies to ignore intellectual debts and the
research achievements of others"-charges made by Himes
(1981:182-83), an economist in the Ford Foundation-and not
even because of their relative inability to buy books, but be-
cause such underdone scholarship does not really assist in the
development of the kind of consciousness Peruvians are working
on.
by JAMES M. WALLACE
Department of Anthropology and Sociology, North Carolina
State University, P.O. Box 5535, Raleigh, N.C. 27650, U.S.A.
7 xii 82
Osterling and Martinez have done us the service of putting in
one place the names, events, programs, and institutions associ-
ated with the modern history of Peruvian social anthropology.
However, I am disappointed that they did not go beyond the
descriptive note-listing style they have employed. They do not
attempt to write a history, and I hope they plan to do so in a
future publication. The work at hand is tantalizing for its
promise of continued work on this very important enterprise.
Peru is one of those places that has been a crossroads for inter-
national scholars of all the social sciences. Ideas, philosophies,
methodologies, and people from all over the globe have met
here and in the process have learned much about Peru, anthro-
pology, Peruvians, and themselves. A history of Peruvian social
anthropology would probably reflect the history of Western
anthropology, and so here we could learn much about what we
anthropologists have accomplished.
This history is a very imposing task, one which the authors
have shied away from for reasons that are themselves a part of
the history-factions and politics. This is clear at least from the
polite treatment that the professors at the UNMSM and the
PUCP receive. In contrast, the ILV, everybody's scapegoat, is
criticized, as it is safe and expected that they receive criticism.
In Peruvianist anthropology it seems that all of us have sinned,
because no one wants to cast the first stone in print.
Still, I have some additions to make to the "Notes...
First, more discussion should be given to anthropology at the
UNMSCH of Ayacucho. In the mid-'60s, R. T. Zuidema,
S. Palomino, U. Quispe, S. Catacora, John Earls, and others con-
tributed some outstanding studies in ethnography and eth-
nology. It is no accident that such outstanding people as Mil-
lones, Mayer, B. J. Isbell, and B. Isbell have had strong ties to
the University of Illinois, where Zuidema teaches. In addition
to these people, mention should also be made of Efrain Morote
Best and Osman Morote Best for their contributions to Peru-
vian folklore and anthropology from the Ayacucho area. In
recent times, anthropology at the UNMSCH has suffered from
governmental cutbacks, but it remains an important place for
the history of Peruvian social anthropology.
In the same way, we must also consider the important work
that has been carried out at the Plan de Fomento Linguistico
Aplicado started by Alberto Escobar and energetically directed
by Inez Pozzi-Escot. Works by Gary Parker and Donald Sola
were supported by this program. It also undertook an important
experimental bilingual education program in Quinua, Ayacucho.
Escobar has also contributed other important works outside of
this program. In addition, there have been many other people
inside and outside Peru associated with PFLA, Pozzi-Escot,
and Escobar who have made important contributions.
Even though I also think that the ILV deserves criticism for
its poor information-dissemination record, it has produced a
large number of linguistic volumes and has also made an inter-
esting attempt at bilingual education in both the selva and the
sierra (Ayacucho). The Ayacucho program is especially interest-
ing in view of the PFLA program in Quinua mentioned above.
Finally, I think one major criticism to be leveled at the
authors is their failure to include archeology and physical an-
thropology in their notes. Peruvian social anthropology's his-
tory is intimately entwined with archeology, especially, so the
history is incomplete without it. I also fault the authors for not
discussing at all the critical evaluation of Peruvian anthro-
pology made by Arambur(u (1978), but since he and the authors
are colleages. . . I certainly hope that the history of Peru-
vian anthropology can be written. I am glad Osterling and
Martinez also aspire to that end.
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY
Reply
by JORGE P. OSTERLING
Arlington, Va., U.S.A. 15 I 83
Many thanks to the seven colleagues who have taken the time
to comment on our article, especially those who have enriched
it with their supplementary information. Thanks also to the
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY staff in charge of translating this
article from the Spanish and editing the English version. The
quality of their work speaks for itself. I have twice discussed
the comments by phone with Hector Martinez, and he has
asked me to prepare our reply. In it we address a number of
points raised by the commentators and supplement the infor-
mation contained in the article. After explaining how and why
we decided to write the article, we discuss the environment that
has shaped Peruvian anthropology; the existing information
resources; influential individuals; problems of communication;
studies conducted outside Lima; the training of Peruvian an-
thropologists; social and political influences; and studies of
tribal societies.
While Dobyns and Doughty supplement the information we
offered and place Peruvian social anthropology in perspective
(Dobyns quite accurately emphasizing the influence of anthro-
pology on policies and programs in Peru), Altamirano urges us
to comment on the work of "provincial" (i.e., non-Lima-based)
scholars and institutions. Stein takes a Marxist approach. Un-
fortunately, along with work which may be of lesser value, he
discounts the many valuable contributions of non-Peruvian
scholars to the study of Peru. However, he also recognizes the
difficult conditions under which Peruvian scholars work.
Finally, Orlove, Siverts, and Wallace seem to have misunder-
stood our intentions, which were to present notes for a history
of Peruvian social anthropology as only the first step in pre-
paring such a history.
The difference between native Peruvian anthropology and
"Peruvianist" studies as practiced in the U.S.A. and Western
Europe is an issue that we broadly discussed while preparing
the article and one that has been the source of many comments.
At an informal gathering in 1979, we discussed the urgent
need for a study of the development of Peruvian social anthro-
pology in the post-World War II years (i.e., after Steward's
Handbook of South American Indians), a period that coincided
with the conferring of the first social anthropology degrees by
Peruvian universities. (We called this period "the professional
phase" because earlier studies had been done by colleagues
from other fields who lacked formal anthropological training.)
During these conversations we commented upon the fact that
very few colleagues of the younger generation were familiar
with the beginnings of our field in Peru. It seemed to us possible
to suggest that during the past 40 years Peruvian as well as
non-Peruvian "Peruvianist" anthropologists had engaged in
almost every possible anthropological field of expertise and
that within each of these different theoretical as well as political
factions might be distinguished. We noted that no major syn-
thesis had been written since the Handbook; that the majority
of Peruvian anthropologists did not work in academia, but were
engaged more in public administration (e.g., Office of the Prime
Minister, Ministry of Agriculture, National Institute of Plan-
ning) or in privately sponsored research; and that the results
of current research, both applied and theoretical, were not
readily available within the country. We also noted that most
of our colleagues were working 12 to 14 hours a day at two or
three different jobs and that most of the best publications were
of limited circulation, many of them mimeographed.
Perhaps 70-80% of Peruvian anthropologists since the '40s
have been civil servants, usually under the immediate super-
vision of an economist, agronomist, or lawyer, while fewer than
20-30%o have been engaged in traditional academic-related
activities. In the United States, for example, the situation has
been quite the opposite: the great majority of anthropologists
have been engaged in academic-related activities and only re-
cently, in the last ten years, have as many as 10-20%
of Ameri-
can anthropologists (i.e., what are called "professional" anthro-
pologists in the United States) become engaged in nonacademic
activities. This observation led us to discuss such issues as the
nature of anthropological research, professional ethics, and
publication. While very few Peruvian scholars were doing
"classical" academic research, the great majority of them were
constantly engaged in short-term social evaluations or social
surveys, usually of peasant or tribal communities, for strictly
practical purposes (e.g., land reform, land titles, water rights).
A major difference between their work and that of their
foreign colleagues was that, since it was performed in the con-
text of the civil service, in many cases it helped to determine
social policy. (In others, it was never considered!) More often,
these studies were discussed in staff meetings usually chaired
by nonanthropologists and followed guidelines drawn up by
colleagues in other professions. In some cases, reports were
openly discussed with informants, offering a very rich oppor-
tunity to improve them through feedback. However, there
remained the issue of the immediate implications of the anthro-
pological study for the community or group studied.
Another issue we discussed was the unemployment crisis. In
1969 the military government had entered upon an ambitious
land reform program and in the process strengthened the
national Office for Peasant Communities; Mario C. Vfazquez was
made its chief. Three years later the office was absorbed by the
Sistema Nacional para la Mobilizacion Social (SINAMOS),
which was intended to become the nation's major social agency
and of which the anthropologist Carlos Delgado became vice-
minister. SINAMOS began recruiting anthropologists, sociolo-
gists, and political scientists, thus creating a demand for pro-
fessionals and an artificial "boom" at the universities. In 1977,
the government closed down the agency, and this generated a
terrible unemployment crisis for our colleagues, a crisis that
coincided with general unemployment, sharp currency devalua-
tions, and decline in purchasing power. It was in this context
that some professionals had shifted to other government agen-
cies, while many of them had decided to organize the more than
100 research centers we have mentioned. These centers received
the gracious support of many international foundations for
their activities and publications.
Considering, as Doughty states, that in the U.S.A. alone
there are about 145 Ph.D. dissertations dealing with Peruvian
ethnology and that more than 600 places (mostly rural peasant
communities) have been studied, we decided to adopt a more
institutional approach. We made this decision also in the light
of the fact that we would have had to review all the Peruvian
B.A. theses (some of them resulting from original research and
of a quality and size comparable to American doctoral disser-
tations) as well as Licenciado, Master's, and Ph.D. theses and
the major government anthropological reports and publica-
tions. (This work remains to be done.) To follow up on Stein's
remarks on how anthropological studies are conducted in Peru,
this paper was written without the benefit of grant money,
research assistants, computers, photocopying machines, or ac-
cess to adequate libraries. It was impossible for us to "distill"
every single one of the publications dealing with contemporary
Peru which are available in Peruvian, American, and Western
European libraries. (Many of these, incidentally, are unavail-
able in Peru.) Therefore we made the conscious decision to
prepare an article for CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY in the hope that
it would generate, as an academic "catalyst," a discussion of
people, issues, and trends that would ease the writing of major
future publications.
Vol. 24 * No. 3 * June 1983 355
A very important issue explicitly raised by Stein and Wallace
and implied by Orlove is that in order to understand Peruvian
social anthropology one must consider factionalism and what
could be called "academic politics." Despite the fact that this
is a highly sensitive issue, we think we must refer to it, at least
very briefly, both from a Peruvian and from a broader inter-
national point of view.
The feuds, within Peru, well known but usually not openly
acknowledged, between what could be called the current "gate-
keepers" and those to come have often prevented scholars of
all generations from gaining information and/or obtaining
grants and fellowships. They have also stood in the way of the
publication of materials and the national or international expo-
sure of research results. Delgado (1968) published a critical
study of this phenomenon and its implications. On the inter-
national level, we think that it is possible to highlight, as
Doughty correctly comments, the special influence of a few
such scholars as Holmberg, Rowe, Schaedel, Murra, Doughty,
and Zuidema, from American universities, and Long and
Roberts, from British universities. These scholars, through
their research and publications, not only developed the major
trends of "Peruvianist" anthropology, but also became gradu-
ate-school advisers to a rather large number of American and
Peruvian anthropologists, many of whom are now distinguished
professors or research associates. These scholars do not always
share points of view-a fact that deserves our respect. To
present an oversimplified example, while Holmberg, Doughty,
Long, and Roberts place a very strong emphasis on studies of
contemporary social phenomena and on social change, Rowe,
Schaedel, Murra, and Zuidema stress, each from his own per-
spective, the urgent need for ethnohistorical research on the
Andean tradition. The major trends in the theoretical and ap-
plied work of non-Peruvian "Peruvianists," can, we think, be
traced to the academic ambiance of a relatively small number of
American and British departments of anthropology (e.g.,
Cornell, California-Berkeley, Texas-Austin, Illinois-Urbana-
Champaign, Manchester, Durham, and, more recently, Florida-
Gainesville). It is no accident that almost all of our commen-
tators are or have been faculty members or students in one of
these places.
Altamirano highlights a major characteristic of Peruvian
social anthropology also discussed by Doughty: the lack of
continuous communication and feedback among scholars work-
ing within Peru. Since no Peruvian anthropological association
exists, there are few forums for the exchange of research results
and ideas. Some of these few are such journals as the Revista
del Museo Nacional (with a strong emphasis on archeology and
ethnohistory), Amazonia Peruana (specializing in lowland
tribal societies), Allpanchis (specializing in highland peasant
societies), and Debates en Antropologia. Another important
opportunity to exchange research results and ideas has been
offered by the periodic conferences on "Man in the Andean
World," largely concerned with ethnohistorical interests. Many
outstanding contributions in Peruvian social anthropology have
been made by scholars working in non-Lima-based institutions
who publish only in Spanish and in limited-circulation formats.
Furthermore, as Dobyns points out, most of the research done
by anthropologists working for the Peruvian government over
the past 40 years has either been treated as classified or has
failed to be circulated through inertia. A classic example is
Chirif and Mora's (1976) carefully prepared and edited Atlas
de Comunidades Nativas, a 248-page compendium of basic infor-
mation on our more than 53 ethnolinguistic groups that includes
an excellent collection of maps and bibliography. This work is a
must for every Peruvianist library but is currently a rare book
despite its recent publication.
Altamirano comments on the need to expand more on what
has been done at the "provincial level." As we indicated, Peru
currently has seven departments of anthropology that award
degrees, five in the "provinces" and two in Lima.
Cuzco has the oldest department of anthropology outside
Lima. There, thanks to the enthusiasm of John H. Rowe and
to the timely assistance of John Gillin, Richard Schaedel, Harry
Tschopik, and others, an excellent research center was organ-
ized during World War II, one that trained a generation of
outstanding professors including Oscar N(ufiez del Prado, well
known for his studies in Kuyo Chico (English version, 1973),
Sicuani (1962), and Puerto Maldonado (1962), and Gabriel
Escobar, known by his research on the highly dynamic com-
munity of Sicaya (1973). Among contemporary scholars, the
significant work of Jorge Flores Ochoa since the early 1960s has
focused on the alpaca herdsmen of the altiplano, a major con-
tribution to the study of ecology, economy, and culture (Flores
Ochoa 1964, 1968, 1977). This topic has become one of the most
challenging themes for anthropologists interested in studying
southern Peru's peasantry. Ricardo Valderrama Escalante and
Carmen Escalante Gutierrez's (1977) life history of one of
Cuzco's wholesale market porters includes reflections on his
early peasant childhood and his traumatic incorporation into
urban and national society as interpreted through traditional
Andean symbols and myths.
Ayacucho's department of anthropology is the subject of a
recently published preliminary report by Enrique Gonzales
Carre (1982). After commenting upon the very important role
played by many distinguished Peruvian and American scholars
in this part of the country since the "re-opening" of this univer-
sity on July 3, 1959 (it was closed in 1886), he contrasts what
he considers the basic student motivations in the early 1960s
with those of the early 1970s. He describes the situation of the
early 1960s as follows: "The purpose of studying the profession
of anthropology in that period responded to a need to prepare
either to become an official of a public or private agency, to
participate in development or national planning projects or in
academic research, or to get involved in teaching" (p. 134). A
couple of pages later, he summarizes his ideas about his students
in the early 1970s in the following terms: "In recent years those
who begin studies of anthropology within social sciences do it
bearing in mind that it implies a sort of training in political
science that will provide them with a unique and exclusive
background enabling them to participate as motivators and
transforming elements of the society in which they live and
with which they feel violently dissatisfied" (p. 136).
We believe that Gonzales Carre's description of student
interests in Ayacucho can easily be applied to the national
situation. During the 1960s and more intensively in the 1970s
there was a growing conviction on the part of an ever larger
number of Peruvian anthropologists that they should be doing
what Stefano Varese called "an ethnology of urgency" (Varese
1969): undertaking research acknowledging that anthropolo-
gists work with very poor human beings and that, cognizant
of the concerns of these people and the realities of their lives,
they have an ethical commitment to provide the data and
ideas for timely, sensitive, and effective national and interna-
tional development policies. If this sounds political, it is im-
portant to remember, to paraphrase Orlove, that the anthro-
pologist doing fieldwork in Peru is not a "white-gowned micro-
biologist in his lab." While he is developing rapport with his
informants, he tacitly assumes an ethical responsibility to work
very hard at improving their living conditions while he is pub-
lishing books, giving lectures, and gaining international prestige
thanks to "his Indians." In this context, reciprocity is only to
be expected as just and fair.
In response to my request for their comments on the article,
Jorge Recharte and Adriana Soldi, former PUCP graduate
students currently pursuing Ph.D. degrees in anthropology
at
Cornell, pointed to the strong influence of interdisciplinary
training in Peru. For example, most upper-division under-
graduate students in anthropology take compulsory courses in
history, sociology, and statistics. (In the particular case of
the PUCP, three upper-division courses are on Durkheim,
Weber, and Marx.) They also suggested that any review of
Peruvian anthropological research in the 1970s and perhaps
earlier ought to consider the valuable contributions of such
distinguished Peruvian historians as Waldemar Espinosa (1971).
Pablo Macera (1977), Franklin Pease (1973, 1978), and Maria
Rostworowski de Diez Canseco (1961, 1977).
A third point made by Recharte and Soldi was that to under-
stand the major theoretical themes, the cases chosen for study,
the methodology used, and the publishers of the results, it was
essential to take into account the social and political atmos-
phere of the period under consideration. For example, they
remind us, Jose Maria Arguedas (1911-69)-a native Quechua-
speaker from the highland town of Andahuaylas (Apurimac)
and one of Peru's most distinguished novelists as well as an
anthropologist-began studying the Andean world in terms of
the dichotomy "Indian-White," considering himself an Indian
and using the "White" social category as a negative reference
group. However, over the years he began to accept the notion
of a process of mestizaje (a kind of acculturation) that would
not, however, abandon indigenous values. As Marzal (1981:
484-89) was to comment, Arguedas was in this endeavor simply
projecting his personal experience onto all the Quechua-speak-
ing Peruvian peasants who would eventually become accul-
turated and participate actively in the "dominant" Spanish-
speaking national society (cf. Arguedas 1975).
Peruvian anthropological research in the Amazon Basin
began very late compared with studies done in the highlands.
Varese's La sal de los cerros (1968), an in-depth study of Campa
society and the changes in it under Spanish colonization, con-
tinues to be, as Pease (1979:178) comments, "the most com-
plete study of a Peruvian ethnic society." Since the late 1960s,
thanks to the strong influence of Varese both in academic and
in governmental circles, Peruvians have begun to work inten-
sively on tribal societies. A very important institution of these
years was the Division of Amazonian Populations created in
1970 within the national Office of Peasant Communities.
Varese was its first chief. A year later it changed its name to
become the Division of Native Communities of the Jungle. In
1972 it was incorporated into SINAMOS, and in the late 1970s
it was virtually closed down (i.e., left with only two employees).
Among the valuable academic and applied work of these years
in the Peruvian jungle were, simply to cite a few foreign
scholars, Berlin's (1976; Berlin and Berlin 1975) long-term
ethnoscientific studies among the Aguaruna of the Alto Mara-
fnon River, Bodley's (1973) study of Campa trade patterns,
Denevan's (1970) study of Campa subsistence, D'Ans's (1975)
study of Cashinagua mythology, Johnson's (1975) work among
the Machiguenga of southern Peru, Jordana's (1974) collection
of Aguaruna and Huambisa myths and stories, Siskind's (1973)
study of the Sharanahua, with emphasis on the effects of the
powerful hallucinogenic drug ayaluasca, and Weiss's (1975)
detailed study of the Campa belief system. On the applied
level, the Division of Native Communities worked very hard
to ensure that all tribal societies would soon gain legal titles to
their land. As late as 1971 the most recent legislation on the
subject was a 1909 law that eased the government sale of
jungle land for "development" purposes (Law 1220). Strong
lobbying had to be done to get new legislation that would
protect the rights of our native population. Varese began the
work in 1970; he was succeeded by me in early 1972 and I by
Chirif and Mora later in that year. Finally, in June 1974 the
military government drafted Law 20653, intended exclusively
to guarantee the rights of tribal societies. It is not a perfect
piece of legislation, but it is an improvement on what went
before it.
In speaking of tribal societies, special mention should be
made of certain Roman Catholic missionaries who preceded
anthropologists in the study of these societies and in the
struggle to guarantee their rights. To mention only a few of
these, in the Aguaruna and Huambisa area the Jesuit Jose
Maria Guallart has been working very hard for the last 30
years; in the Iquitos area the late Father Jes(us San Roman
gave his life for the natives' cause; and in the Pucallpa area the
French Canadian priests have played a very active role in
guaranteeing the Shipibo's and Conibo's legal titles to their
land.
We believe that there is an urgent need for a document that
sets forth the basic facts, names, and circumstances in a
descriptive way, without any other pretensions, as a first step
toward a critical analysis of more than 40 years of anthropologi-
cal research in Peru. Before getting involved in highly sophisti-
cated discussions and polemics, then, we have here attempted
to assemble these elements, recording the people, projects, and
institutions that have been the major contributors to Peruvian
anthropology.
References Cited
ADAMS, RICHARD N. 1959. A commutnity in the Andes: Problems and
progress in Muquiyauyo. Seattle: American Ethnological Society.
ALBERTI, GIORGIO, and ENRIQUE MAYER. 1974. "Reciprocidad
andina: Ayer y hoy," in Reciprocidad e intercambio en los Andes
peruanos. Edited by Giorgio Alberti and Enrique Mayer, pp. 13-
33. Lima: Instituto de Estudios Peruanos. [BSOI
ALTAMIRANO RUA, TE6FILO. 1980. Regional commitment and
political involvement amongst migrants in Peru. Unpublished
Ph.D. dissertation, University of Durham, Durham, England.
ANAYA FRANCO, EDUARDO. 1974. Imperialismo, industrializacion y
transferencia de tecnologia en el Peri. Lima: Horizonte. [WWSI
ANDREWS, DAVID H. 1963. Paucartambo, Pasco, Peru: An indigenous
community and a change program. Unpublished doctoral disserta-
tion, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y. [HFD]
ANDREWS, DAVID H., with collaboration of ELVIRA DORREGARAY C.,
GIL DURAN, ROSA MEJfA C., GERARDO VIVAS E., and ANTENOR
ZAMUDIO B. 1965. Paucartambo, Pasco, Peru: Whence ... whither.
Cornell University Department of Anthropology, Socio-Economic
Development of Andean Communities 7. [HFD]
ARAMBURU', CARLOS E. "Aspectos del desarrollo de la antropologia
en el Per(u," in Ciencias sociales en el Per7l: Un balance critico.
Edited by B. Podesta, pp. 1-33. Lima: Universidad del Paclfico.
--. 1981. Migraci6n interna en el Pert: Perspectivas te6ricas y
metodol6gicas. Lima: Instituto Andino de Estudios en Desarrollo y
Poblacion.
ARGUEDAS, JOSE MARfA. 1956. Puquio: Una cultura en proceso de
cambio. Revista del Museo Nacional 25: 184-232.
--. 1957. La evoluci6n de las comunidades indigenas. Revista del
Museo Nacional 26.
--. 1963. Las comunidades de Castilla y el Peru(: Estructura
social del grupo; cooperacion; dos economias, dos mundos. Revista
del Museo Nacional 32:81-88.
---. 1975. Formaci6n de la cultura nacional Indoamericana.
Edited by Angel Rama. Mexico: Siglo XXI.
AVALOS DE MATOS, ROSALfA. 1951. El ciclo vital en la comunidad de
Tupe. Revista del Museo Nacional 21:107-84.
BASADRE, JORGE. 1931. Pert: Problema y posibilidad. Lima: Rosay.
BELAU'NDE, VICTOR ANDRES. 1931. La realidad nacional. Paris.
BERLIN, BRENT. 1976. The concept of rank in ethnobiological
classification: Some evidence from the Aguaruna folk botany.
American Ethnologist 3:381-99.
BERLIN, BRENT, and ELOIS ANN BERLIN. 1975. Aguaruna color
categories. American Ethnologist 2:61-87.
BODLEY, JOHN H. 1973. Deferred exchange among the Campa
Indians. Anthropos 68:589-96.
BOLUARTE, FRANCISCO. 1959. "La comunidad de Santiago de Anchu-
caya," in Las actuales comunidades de indigenas de Huarochiri en
1955. Edited by J. Matos Mar. Lima: Instituto de Etnologia de la
UNMSM.
BONILLA, HERACLIO. 1974. El minero de los Andes. Lima: Instituto de
Estudios Peruanos.
BOURQUE, SUSAN C., LESLIE A. BROWNRIGG, EILEEN A. MAYNARD,
and HENRY F. DOBYNS. 1967. Factions and faenas: The develop-
mental potential of Checras District, Peru. Cornell University
Department of Anthropology, Socio-Economic Development of
Andean Communities 9. [HFD]
BOURQUE, SUSAN C., and KAY BARBARA WARREN. 1981. Women of
the Andes: Patriarchy and social change in two Peruvian towns.
Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
BOURRICAUD, FRANgOIS.
1954. Algunas caracteristicas originales de
Vol. 24 * No. 3 * June 1983 357
la cultura mestiza en el Per(u contemporaneo. Revista del Museo
Nacional 23:162-73.
--. 1963. Castas y clases en Puno. Revista del Museo Nacional
32:308-22.
1967. Cambios en Puno: Estudios de sociologia andina.
Mexico: Instituto Indigenista Interamericano.
BRADFIELD, STILLMAN. 1963. Migration from Huaylas: A study of
brothers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Cornell University,
Ithaca, N.Y.
CAMINO, ALEJANDRO. 1977. Trueque, correrias e intercambios entre
los Quechuas andinos y los Piro y Machiguenga de la montafia
peruana. Amazonia Peruana 1 (2):123-40.
CASTILLO, HERNAJN, TERESA EGOAVIL DE CASTILLO, and ARCENIO
REVILLA C. 1964. Carcas: The forgotten community. Edited by
Eileen A. Maynard. Cornell University Department of Anthro-
pology, Socio-Economic Development of Andean Communities 1.
[HFD]
CASTILLO A., HERNAJN, with the collaboration of AURELTO CARMONA,
ELSA ALCANTARA, Luz ESPINOSA, and COTY GIRON. 1964. Chaqui-
cocha: Community in progress. Translated by Patricia Deustua;
edited by Eileen A. Maynard. Cornell University Department of
Anthropology, Socio-Economic Development of Andean Com-
munities 5. [HFD]
CASTILLO A., HERNAJN, in collaboration with MARIA SANCHEZ
NANCY MUNOZ, VICTOR MARIN, and ESTEBAN CALDERON. 1964.
Mito: The orphan of its illustrious children. Translated and edited
by Eileen A. Maynard. Cornell University Department of Anthro-
[HFDJ
CASTRO Pozo, HILDEBRANDO. 1924. Nuestra comunidad indigena.
Lima: Lucero.
--. 1936. Del ayllu al cooperativismo socialista. Biblioteca de la
Revista de Economi a y Finanzas 2.
CHIRIF, ALBERTO. Editor. 1979. Etnicidad y ecologia. Lima: Centro de
Investigaci6n y Promocion Amazonica.
CHIRIF, ALBERTO, and CARLOS MORA. Editors. 1976. Atlas de
comunidades nativas. Lima: Sistema Nacional de Apoyo a la
Movilizaci6n Social.
CHOY, EMILIO. 1955. Problematica de los origenes del hombre y la
cultura en America. Revista del Museo Nacional 24:210-51.
1960. La revolucion neolitica y los origenes de la civilizaci6n
peruana. Antiguo Peri: Tiempo y Espacio, pp. 149-97.
1966. La realidad y el utopismo de Guaman Poma. Univer-
sidad 3(7):1-2.
. 1979. Antropologia e historia. Lima: Universidad Nacional
Mayor de San Marcos.
COTLER, JULIO. 1959. Los cambios en la propiedad, la comunidad y la
familia en San Lorenzo de Quinti. Lima: Instituto de Etnologia de la
UNMSM.
--. 1978. Clases, estado y naci6n en el Per?i. Lima: Instituto de
Estudios Peruanos.
D'ANS, ANDRE-MARCEL. 1975. La Verdadera Biblia de los Cashinahua:
Mitos, leyendas y tradiciones de la selva peruana. Lima: Mosca Azul.
DELGADO OLIVERA, CARLOS. 1968. Para una sociologia del arribismo
en el Pertu. Amaru, March.
--. 1969. An analysis of "arribismo" in Peru. Human Organiza-
tion 28:133-39. [HFD]
DENEVAN, WILLIAM M. 1970. "Campa subsistence in the Gran
Pajonal, eastern Peru." Actas del XXXIX Congreso de Americanis-
tas, vol. 4, pp. 161-79.
DOBYNS, HENRY F. 1964. The social matrix of Peruvian indigenous
communities. Ithaca: Cornell University Department of Anthro-
pology Cornell Peru Project.
--. 1966. The struggle for land in Peru: The Hacienda Vicos
case. Ethnolhistory 13:97-122. [HFD]
-. 1970. Comunidades campesinas del Per?i. Lima: Editorial
Estudios Andinos. [HFD]
DOBYNS, HENRY F., PAUL L. DOUGHTY, and ALLAN R. HOLMBERG.
1965. Measurement of Peace Corps program impact in the Peruvian
Andes: Final report. Ithaca: Cornell University Department of
Anthropology. [HFD]
DOBYNS, HENRY F., PAUL L. DOUGHTY, and HAROLD D. LASSWELL.
Editors. 1971. Peasants, power, and applied social change: Vicos as a
model. Beverly Hills: Sage. [HFD]
DOBYNS, HENRY F., and ABRAHAM GUILLEN M. 1970. Visual anthro-
pology of Peru: The photographly of Abraham Guillen M. Lexington:
University of Kentucky Book Store. [HFD]
DOBYNS, HENRY F., ALLAN R. HOLMBERG, MORRIS E. OPLER, and
LAURISTON SHARP. 1967. Strategic intervention in the cultural
change process. Ithaca: Cornell University Department of Anthro-
pology Comparative Studies of Cultural Change. [HFD]
DOBYNS, HENRY F., and MARIO C. VAiZQUEZ. Editors. 1963. Migra-
ci6n e integracion en el Per?i. Lima: Editorial Estudios Andinos.
[HFD]
DOUGHTY, PAUL L. 1964. La migracion provinciana, regionalismo y
el desarrollo local. Economi~a y Agricultura 1:203-11. [HFD]
--. 1968. Huaylas: An Andean district in search of progress.
Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
--. 1970. "Behind the back of the city: 'Provincial' life in Lima,
Peru," in Peasants in cities. Edited by W. Mangin, pp. 30-46.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
--. 1972. "Peruvian migrant identity in the urban milieu," in
The anthropology of urban environments. Edited by Thomas Weaver
and Douglas White, pp. 39-50. Society for Applied Anthropology
Monograph 11. [HFD]
--. 1976. "Social policy and urban growth," in Peruvian national-
ism. Edited by David Chaplin, pp. 75-110. New York: Trans-
Action Books. [HFD]
. 1977. Thirty years of Andean ethnology: From the Pensi6n
Morris to institute and foundation. Paper presented to the annual
meeting of the American Anthropological Association, Houston,
Tex. [PLD]
DOUGHTY, PAUL L., with MARY F. DOUGHTY. 1968. Huaylas. Ithaca:
Cornell University Press. [HFD]
DOUGHTY, PAUL L., and LUIS NEGRON. 1964. Pararin: A break with
the past. Cornell University Department of Anthropology, Socio-
Economic Development of Andean Communities 6. [HFD]
ESCOBAR, GABRIEL. 1973. Sicaya: Cambios culturales en una comu-
nidad mestiza andina. Lima: Instituto de Estudios Peruanos.
ESPINOSA SORIANO, WALDEMAR. 1971. Los Huancas aliados de la
conquista: Tres informaciones ineditas sobre la participaci6n indigena
en la conquista del Peril (1558-1561). Huancayo: Universidad
Nacional del Centro del Per'u.
EZELL, PAUL H. 1966. Man and land in Bolivia: The Hacienda
Orurillo case. Etlinohistory 13:123-44. [HFD]
FAVRE, HENRI. 1965. Algunos problemas referentes a la industria
minera de Huancavelica. Cuadernos de Antropologia 3(8):16-24.
--. 1976 (1956). "Evolucion y situaci6n de la hacienda tradi-
cional de la regi6n de Huancavelica," in Hacienda, comunidad y
campesinado en el Peril. Edited by J. Matos Mar, pp. 105-38.
Lima: Instituto de Estudios Peruanos.
FLORES OCHOA, JORGE A. 1964. Pastores del Ande Sur-Peruano.
Revista de la Universidad Tecnica del Altiplano 2: 131-38.
--. 1968. Los pastores de Paratia: Una introducci6n a su estudio.
Mexico: Instituto Indigenista Interamericano.
--. 1977. Pastores de Puna: Uywamichliq Punarunakuna. Lima:
Instituto de Estudios Peruanos.
FRIED, JACOB. 1960. Enfermedad y organizacion social. Etnologia y
Arqueologia 1(1):38-49.
FUENZALIDA VOLLMAR, FERNANDO. 1965. Santiago y el Wamani:
Aspectos de un culto pagano. CGadernos de Antropologia 3(8):
118-38.
--. 1970. "La estructura de la comunidad de indigenas tradi-
cionales," in El campesino en el Perfi. Edited by R. Keith et al.
. 1979. El Cristo pagano de los Andes: Una cuesti6n de identi-
dad. Debates en Antropologia 4: 1-10.
FUENZALIDA, FERNANDO, J. L. VILLARAZN, J. GOLTE, and TERESA
VALIENTE. Estructuras tradicionales y economia de mercado: La
comunidad de indigenas de Huayopampa. Lima: Instituto de
Estudios Peruanos.
GALDO PAGAZA, RAU'L. 1962a. El indigena y el mestizo de Vilque-
chico. MS, Plan Nacional de Integracion de la Poblacion Abori-
gen, Ministerio de Trabajo, Lima.
1962b. Economia de las colectividades indigenas colindantes
con el Lago Titicaca. MS, Plan Nacional de Integracion de la
Poblacion Aborigen, Ministerio de Trabajo, Lima.
GARCfA, JOSE URIEL. 1930. El nuevo indio. Lima.
GARCfA BLAJZQUEZ, RAU'L, and CESAR R. CORDOVA. 1969. Bibliografia
de los estudios y publicaciones del Instituto Indigenista Peruano
(1961-1969). America Indigena 31: 761-827.
GHERSI BARRERA, HUMBERTO. 1958. Practicas funerarias en la
comunidad de Vir(u. Revista del Museo Nacional 27:106-39.
--. 1959-61. El indigena y el mestizo en la comunidad de Mar-
cara. Revista del Museo Nacional 28:118-88; 29:48-128; 30:95-176.
GONZALES CARRE, ENRIQUE. 1982. Antropologia en Ayacucho:
Informe preliminar. Debates en Antropologia 6:128-40.
GUILLEN ARAOZ, TERESA. 1953. La comunidad de Huarochiri.
Revista del Museo Nacional 22:191-230.
HAYA DE LA TORRE, VfCTOR RAU'L. 1927. Por la emancipaci6n de
America Latina. Lima.
HICKMAN, JOHN M. 1975. Los Aymara de Chinchera, Peru: Persis-
tencia y cambio en un contexto bicultural. Instituto Indigenista
Interamericano, Ediciones Especiales 70. [HFD]
HIMES, JAMES R. 1981. "The impact in Peru of the Vicos project,"
in Research in economic anthropology. Edited by George M. Dalton,
pp. 141-209. London: JAI Press. [HFD, WWS]
HOLMBERG, ALLAN. 1952. "The wells that failed: An attempt to
establish a stable water supply in the Viru Valley, Peru," in
Human problems in technological change. Edited by E. H. Spicer.
New York: Wiley.
- .1966. Vicos: Metodo y prdctica de antropologia aplicada.
Lima: Editorial de Estudios Andinos.
HOLMBERG, ALLAN R., and HENRY F. DOBYNS. 1969. "The Cornell
program in Vicos, Peru," in Subsistence agriculture and economic
development. Edited by C. R. Wharton, Jr., pp. 392-414. Chicago:
Aldine. [HFD]
HOLMBERG, ALLAN R., and CARLOS MONGE M. 1952. Acuerdo
celebrado entre la Universidad de Cornell y el Instituto Indigenista
Peruano. Peru Indigena 2:85-86. [HFD]
ISBELL, BILLIE JEAN. 1974. "Parentesco andino y reciprocidad
Kuyaq: Los que nos aman," in Reciprocidad e intercambio en los
Andes peruanos. Edited by Giorgio Alberti and Enrique Mayer.
. 1976. La otra mitad esencial: Un estudio de complementa-
riedad sexual en los Andes. Estudios Andinos 5:37-56.
JOHNSON, ALLEN. 1975. Time allocation in a Machiguenga com-
munity. Ethnology 14:301-10.
JORDANA LAGUNA, JosE Luis. 1974. Mitos e historias aguarunas y
huambisas de la selva del Alto Maranon. Lima: Instituto Nacional
de Investigacion y Desarrollo de la Educaci6n.
KORB, GEORGE M. t966. Ticaco: An Aymara Indian community.
Cornell University Department of Anthropology, Socio-Economic
Development of Andean Communities 8. [HFD]
LAPPE, FRANCES MOORE, JOSEPH COLLINS, and DAVID KINLEY. 1980.
Aid as obstacle. San Francisco: Institute for Food and Develop-
ment Policy. [WWS]
MACERA DALL'ORSO, PABLO. 1977. Trabajos de historia. 4 vols.
Lima: Instituto Nacional de Cultura.
MALINOWSKI, B. 1945. The dynamics of culture change: An inquiry
into race relations in Africa. New Haven: Yale University Press.
MANGIN, WILLIAM P. 1960. Organizaci6n social en Vicos. Etnologia
y Arqueologia 1(1):24-37.
1967. Las comunidades altenias en la America Latina. Mexico:
Instituto Indigenista Interamericano.
1979. "Thoughts on twenty-four years of work in Per': The
Vicos project and me," in Long-term field research in social anthro-
pology. Edited by G. M. Foster et al., pp. 65-84. New York,
San Francisco, and London: Academic Press. [WWS]
MARIATEGUI, JOSE CARLOS. 1928. Siete ensayos de interpretaci6n de la
realidad peruana. Lima: Amauta.
MARTfNEZ, HECTOR. 1959. Vicos: Las fiestas en la integraci6n y
desintegraci6n cultural. Revista del Museo Nacional 28:189-247.
--. 1969a. Las migraciones altipldnicas y la colonizaci6n del
Tambopata. Lima: Centro de Estudios de Poblaci6n y Desarrollo.
--. 1969b. Investigaciones antropol6gicos por el Instituto Indi-
genista Peruano (1966-1969). America Indigena 31:471-91.
--. 1980. Migraciones internas en el Periu: Aproximaci6n critica
y bibliogrdfica. Lima: Instituto de Estudios Peruanos.
MARTfNEZ, HECTOR, with M. CAMEO and J. RAMIREZ. 1969. Bibliogra-
fia indigena andina peruana (1900-1968). 2 vols. Lima: Centro de
Estudios de Poblaci6n y Desarrollo.
MARTfNEZ, HFCTOR, and CARLOS SAMANIEGO. 1978. "Politica indi-
genista en el Per'u: 1946-1969," in Campesinado e indigenismo en
America Latina. Edited by E. Valencia et al. Lima: CELATS.
MARZAL, MANUEL M. 1971. El mundo religioso de Urcos. Cuzco:
Instituto de Pastoral Andina.
---. 1977. Estudios de religi6n campesina. Lima: Pontificia
Universidad Cat6lica del Per'u.
-. 1981. Historia de la antropologia indigenista: Mexico y Peru.
Lima: Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Per(u.
MATOS MAR, JOSE. 1948. Tupe: Una comunidad del drea cultural
Kauke en el Peru. Lima: Facultad de Letras de la UNMSM.
. 1949. Las investigaciones antropol6gicas en el Per(u durante
el afio 1949. Revista del Museo Nacional 18:173-75.
---. 1959. Editor. Las actuales comunidades de indigenas de
Huarochiri en 1955. Lima: Instituto de Etnologfa de la UNMSM.
--. 1966. Estudio de las barriadas limefnas, 1955. Lima: Departa-
mento de Antropologia de la UNMSM.
MATOS MAR, JOSE, and ROGGER RAVINES. 1971. Bibliografia periuana
de ciencias sociales (1957-1969). Lima: Instituto de Estudios
Peruanos.
MAYER B., ENRIQUE JOSE. 1974. Reciprocity, self-sufficiency, and
market relations in a contemporary community in the Central
Andes of Peru. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Cornell Univer-
sity, Ithaca, N.Y.
MAYER, ENRIQUE, and RALPH BOLTON. Editors. 1980. Parentesco y
matrimonio en los Andes. Lima: Pontificia Universidad Cat6lica
del Perfu.
MAYNARD, EILEEN A. 1964. Patterns of community service develop-
ment in selected communities of the Mantaro Valley, Peru. Cornell
University Department of Anthropology, Socio-Economic Develop-
ment of Andean Communities 3. [HFD]
-. 1965. Indians in misery. Quito: Cornell University Depart-
ment of Anthropology, Andean Indian Community Research-
and-Development Program. [HFD]
MENDIZABAL LOSACK, EMILIO. 1963-64. La difusi6n, aculturaci6n y
reinterpretaci6n a traves de las cajas del imaginero ayacuchano.
Revista del Museo Nacional 11 and 12.
-.1964. Pacaraos, una comunidad en la parte alta del valle de
Chancay. Revista del Museo Nacional 33.
MERINO DE ZELA, MILDRED. 1958. El cerro San Cosme: Formaci6n de
una barriada. Lima: Facultad de Letras de la UNMSM.
MILLONES SANTA GADEA, Luis. 1964. Un movimiento nativista del
siglo XVI: El Taki Ongoy. Revista Peruana de Cultura 3.
--. 1973. Minorias etnicas en el Peru. Lima: Pontificia Uni-
versidad Catolica del Per6.
MONGE, CARLOS. 1948. Acclimatization in the Andes: Historical
confirmation of climatic aggression in the development of Andean
man. Translated by Donald F. Brown. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins
University Press. [HFD]
-. 1949. Aclimataci6n en los Andes. A merica Indigena 9:267-86.
[HFD]
MONTALVO, ABNER. 1957. Vicos: Experimento antropol6gico. Fana l
12(51):2-7.
MONTOYA,
RODRIGO. 1972-73. Acerca del objeto de la antropologia
en el Periu. MS, Departamento de Antropologia de la UNMSM.
--. 1970. A prop6sito del cardcter predominantemente capitalista
de la economia peruana actual. Lima: Teori a y Realidad.
MORRIS, EARL W., LESLIE A. BROWNRIGG, SUSAN C. BOURQUE, and
HENRY F. DOBYNS. 1968. Coming down the mountain: The social
worlds of Mayobamba. Cornell Universitv Department of Anthro-
[HFD]
MUELLE, JORGE C. 1945a. La chicha en el distrito de San Sebasti6n.
--. 1945b. Pacarectambo: Apuntes de viaje. Revista del Museo
Nacional 14:155-80.
---. 1948a. Estudios etnol6gicos en Vir'i. Documenta (Lima)
1(1): 175-85.
--. 1948b. El estudio del indigena. Revista del Museo Nacional
17: 75-85.
MURRA, JOHN V. 1975. Formaciones econdmicas y politicas del mnundo
andino. Lima: Instituto de Estudios Peruanos.
--. 1978. La organizaci6n econ6mica del estado inca. Mexico:
Siglo XXI.
NUNEZ DEL PRADO, OSCAR. 1951. Aspecto econ6mico de Virtu: Una
comunidad de la costa norte del Periu. Cuzco: Rozas.
--. 1961. El proyecto de antropologia aplicada del Cuzco (Kuyo
Chico). Revista Universitaria (Cuzco), pp. 119-20.
--. 1962a. Relaci6n social para la colonizaci6n del Maldonado.
Plan Nacional de Integraci6n de la Poblaci6n Aborigen, Serie
Monografica 7.
--. 1962b. Sicuani: Un pueblo grande. Plan Nacional de Inte-
graci6n de la Poblaci6n Aborigen, Serie Monografica 8.
--. 1973. Kuyo Chico: Applied anthropology in an Indian com-
munity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
NUIEZ DEL PRADO BEJAR, DAISY IRENE. 1975a. El rol de la mujer
campesina quechua andina. America Indigena 35:391-401.
1975b. El poder de decision de la mujer quechua andina.
America Indigena 35:623-30.
ORTIZ RESCANIEP';, ALEJANDRO. 1973. De Adaneva a Inkarri: Una
visi6n indigena del Peru. Lima: Retablo de Papel.
--. 1980. Huarocltiri, 400 aiios despues. Lima: Pontificia Uni-
versidad Catolica del Per(u.
ORTIZ VERGARA, PEDRO. 1963a. Que es una parcialidad? Peru2
Indigena 10(24-25):65-69.
--. 1963b. Hacienda y colonato en Villurcuni. MS, Plan Nacional
de Integraci6n de la Poblaci6n Aborigen, Ministerio de Trabajo,
Lima.
OssIo ACURA, JUAN. 1973. Ideologia mesidnica del mundo andino.
Lima: Ignacio Prado Pastor.
OSTERLING, JORGE P. 1980. De campesinos a profesionales: Migrantes
de Huayopampa en Lima. Lima: Pontificia Universidad Cat6lica
del Per(u.
--. 1981a. La pobreza urbana a la luz del sector econ6mico
informal urbano: Una perspectiva transcultural. Socialismo y
Participaci6n 16:71-84.
--. 1981b. La estructura socio-economica del comercio ambula-
torio: Algunas hip6tesis de trabajo. Economia 4(8).
PASARA, LUIS. 1978. "Politica y ciencias sociales en el Per'," in
Ciencias sociales en el Perg: Un balance critico. Edited by B.
Podest'a. Lima: Universidad del Pacifico.
PEARSE, ANDREW. 1975. The Latin American peasant. London:
Frank Cass. [WWS]
PEASE G. Y., FRANKLIN. 1973. El dios creador andino. Lima: Mosca
Azul.
--. 1978. Del Tawantinsuyo a la historia del Perui. Lima: Instituto
de Estudios Peruanos.
--. 1979. Perg: Una aproximaci6n bibliogrdfica.
Mexico: Centro
de Estudios Economicos y Sociales del Tercer Mundo.
PEREz, AUGUSTO, and ROSA CACERES. 1981. Fuentes bibliogrdficas
peruanas en las ciencias sociales (1879-1979). Lima: DESCO.
PoRSIINEVr, B. F. 1978. "Opposition as a component of ethnic self-
consciousness," in Perspectives on ethnicity. Edited by R. E.
Holloman and S. A. Arutiunov, pp. 139-46. Trhe Hague and Paris:
Mouton. [WWS]
Vol. 24 * No. 3 * June 1983
PRADO PASTOR, IGNACIO. Editor. 1979. Educaci6n bilingiue: Una
experiencia en la Amazonia Peruana. Lima: Ignacio Prado Pastor.
ROSTWOROWSKI DE DIEz CANSECO, MARfA. 1961. Curacas y suce-
siones, Costa Norte. Lima: Minerva.
. 1977. Etnia y sociedad: Costa peruana pre-hispdnica. Lima:
Instituto de Estudios Peruanos.
RUND, NADINE HANSEN. 1966. The barriadas of Arequipa: A solution
to a problem of urban growth. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y. [HFD]
SALOMON, FRANK. 1982. Andean ethnology in the 1970s: A retro-
spective. Latin American Research Review 17:75-128. [BSO]
SIMMONS, OZZIE G. 1951. El uso de los conceptos de aculturaci6n y
asimilaci6n en el estudio del cambio cultural en el Per(u. Peril
Indigena 2:40-45.
. 1955. The criollo outlook in the mestizo culture of coastal
Peru. American Anthropologist 57: 107-17.
. 1959. Drinking patterns and interpersonal performance in a
Peruvian mestizo community. Quarterly Journal of Studies on
Alcohol 21:103-1l.
SISKIND, JANET. 1973. To hunt in the morning. New York: Oxford
University Press.
SMITH, MARGO LANE. 1971. Institutionalized servitude: The female
domestic servant in Lima, Peru. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,
Indiana University, Bloomington, Ind.
. 1975. "The female domestic servant and social change: Lima,
Peru", in Women cross-culturally. Edited by R. Rohrlich-Leavitt,
pp. 163-80. Chicago: Aldine.
SNYDER, JOAN. "The changing context of an Andean community."
Cultural stability and culture change: Proceedings of the 1957 Annual
Spring Meeting of the American Ethnological Society, pp. 20-29.
Seattle. [HFD]
SOLER, EDUARDO. 1959. "La comunidad de San Pedro de Huancaire,"
in Las actuales comunidades de indigenas de Huarochiri en 1955.
Edited by J. Matos Mar. Lima: Instituto de Etnologia de la
UNMSM.
STEIN, WILLIAM W. 1961. Hualcdn: Life in the highlands of Peru.
Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press. [HFD, WWS]
. 1981. The role of non-peasants in a peasant revolt: Mestizos
and Indians in nineteenth-century Peru. Paper presented in the
panel "Third World Agrarian Labor History: Problems of Method
and Theory," annual meeting of the American Anthropological
Association, Los Angeles, Calif. [WWS]
--. 1982. The limits of peasant movement: Leaders, followers, and
allies in the Atusparia Uprising of 1885, Peru. (Council on Inter-
national Studies Special Study 147.) Amherst, N.Y.: State Uni-
versity of New York at Buffalo. [WWS]
STEPAN, ALFRED. 1978. The state and society: Peru in comparative
perspective. Princeton: Princeton University Press. [WWS]
STEWARD, JULIAN H. Editor. 1946-59. Handbook of South American
Indians. 7 vols. Washington: Smithsonian Institution.
STYCOS, J. MAYONE, and CARA E. RICHARDS. "Fuentes de la migra-
ci6n en la gran Lima," in Migracion e integraci6n en el Perii.
Edited by H. F. Dobyns and M. C. V(azquez, pp. 37-44. Lima:
Editorial Estudios Andinos. [HFD]
TAMAYO HERRERA, JOSE. 1980. Historia del indigenismo cusqueno:
Siglos XVI-XX. Lima: Instituto Nacional de Cultura.
TAX, SOL. Editor. 1975. Fifth international directory of anthropologists.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [PLD]
TORD, LUIS ENRIQUE. 1978. El indio en los ensayislos peruanos,
1848-1948. Lima: Editoriales Unidas.
TRUJILLo FERRARI, ALFONSO. 1952. Lunahuana: Una comunidad
yunga en el Per(u. Revista del Museo Nacional 21:197-206.
TSCHOPIK, HARRY. 1951. The Aymara of Chucuito, Peru. New York:
American Museum of Natural History.
UZZELL, JOHN D. 1972. Bound For Places I'm Not Known To:
Adaptation of migrants and residence in four irregular settlements
in Lima, Peru. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of
Texas, Austin, Tex.
- . 1974a. "The interaction of population and locality in the
development of squatter settlements in Lima," in Latin American
urban research, vol. 4. Edited by W. A. Cornelius and F. N. True-
blood, pp. 113-33. Beverly Hills: Sage.
-. 1974b. Cholos and bureaus in Lima: Case history and analy-
sis. International Journal of Comparative Sociology 15: 23-30.
. 1980. Mixed strategies and the informal sector: Three
faces of reserve labor. Human Organization 39:40-49.
VALCARCEL, Luis E. 1914. La cuestion agraria en el Cuzco. Revista
Universitaria (Cuzco) 9.
1924. De la vida inkaika. Lima: Garcilazo.
1927. Los nuevos indios. Amauta (Lima) 11(9):3-4.
1937. Mirador indio. Lima: Imprenta del Museo Nacional.
1947. Arque6logos y etnologos norteamericanos en el Per'u.
--. 1953. Las comunidades indigenas del Peru. Pert! Indigena
5(12):9-11.
1964. Los Incas y la planificacion. Revista del Museo Nacional
33: 3-11.
-. 1965(1945). 3d edition. Ruta cultural del Pern. Lima: Nuevo
Mundo.
--. 1972(1927). 2d edition. Tempestad en los Andes. Lima:
Universo.
--. 1981. Memorias. Lima: Instituto de Estudios Peruanos.
VALDERRAMA, MARIANO. 1978. "Aportes para una bibliografia del
problema indigena," in Campesinado e indigenismo en America
Latina. Edited by E. Valencia et al. Lima: CELATS.
VALDERRAMA FERNANDEZ, RICARDO, and CARMEN ESCALANTE
GUTIERREZ. 1977. Gregorio Condori Mamani: Autobiografia.
Cuzco: Centro de Estudios Rurales Andinos "Bartolome de las
Casas."
VARESE, STEFANO. 1968. La sal de los cerros: Notas etnogrdficas e
historicas sobre los Campa de la selva del Perul. Lima: Universidad
Peruana de Ciencias y Tecnologia.
1969. Las minorias 'tnicas de la montafia peruana: Esquema
para una antropologia de urgencia. Letras (UNMSM) 80-81:5-23.
-. 1974. Las minor4as gtnicas y la comunidad nacional. Lima:
Centro de Estudios de Participaci6n Popular.
VAZQUEZ, MARIO C. 1952. La antropologia cultural y nuestro prob-
lema del indio: Vicos, un caso de antropologia aplicada. Per2
Indigena 2:5-157. [HFD]
--. 1961. Hacienda, peonaje y servidumbre en los Andes peruanos.
Lima: Editorial Estudios Andinos.
--. 1965. Educacion rural en el Callejon de Huaylas. Lima:
Editorial Estudios Andinos. [HFD]
--. 1967. Bibliografia peruana de ciencias sociales publicada en
ingles 1945-1965. Asociacion Peruana de Antropologos, Serie
Bibliografica 1. [HFD, PLD]
WEISS, GERALD. 1970. "Campa cosmology." Actas del XXXIX
Congreso Internacional de Americanistas, vol. 4, pp. 189-206.
ZUIDEMA, TOM. 1964. The Ceque system of Cusco: The social organiza-
tion of the capital of the Inca. Leiden: J. B. Brill.
Institutions
* The American Italian Historical Association is an organiza-
tion of scholars from a wide variety of social service, human-
istic, and professional disciplines who share an interest in ex-
ploring and understanding all aspects of the relationship of
Italians and America. Its members encourage the collection,
preservation, study, and popularization of materials that illumi-
nate the Italian-American experience in the United States and
Canada. The Association promotes Italian-American studies
through many regional and national activities including an
annual national conference and the publication of the proceed-
ings of these conferences. Past conferences have dealt with the
relationship of Italian-Americans to politics; the novel; radi-
calism; the Jews; urban life; organized crime; the labor move-
ment; the power and class structure; the Church; Italy and
Italians over the past 200 years; women; the professions; rural
and small town experience; etc. Correspondence regarding all
business and membership should be addressed to AIHA Na-
tional Headquarters, 209 Flagg Place, Staten Island, N.Y.
10304, U.S.A.

Notes For A History of Peruvian Social Anthropology

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Notes For A History of Peruvian Social Anthropology

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Notes for a History of Peruvian Social Anthropology, 1940-80 [and Comments and Reply]

You might also like