South American Tropical Forest Material
Feather headdress, Amazonia. PRM 1960.9.3This brief survey is intended as a general introduction to the collections and objects* from the Native Peoples of the South American tropical forest region held by the Pitt Rivers Museum. No attempt has been made at any analysis of the material but rather this is a preliminary step to any future detailed study, as well as being an introduction to the collections. It has been necessary to make an arbitrary decision about where the boundaries of the tropical forest lie. For example, where does the tropical forest give way to the Andean region? It may be that some readers will regard certain groups that have been included here should not have been, and vice-versa. Likewise, by restricting the survey to the tropical forest rather than lowland South America, the peoples of the Gran Chaco and Pampas are excluded.
*Although the word ‘object’ is used here and throughout, in fact the reference is to database entry which is what most researchers will use. The reason for this is that a single entry may well cover a number of objects, e.g., a basket and its lid will constitute two objects or a quiver full of blowpipe darts perhaps as many as 31 objects. It should, however, be noted that this is not always the case; there is an example of a shaman’s rattle of which each item of its contents (pebbles and seeds) has its own entry. Even so the overall result is that there are more objects than database entries. In the case of South America the database has 8,574 entries covering 10,330 objects.
One of the difficulties in preparing this survey has been deciding on the mode of presentation. Three possibilities were considered. The first, which was by collector, was quickly dismissed because, whereas there are a few major collectors, the great majority of collectors are associated with very few items or the identity of the collector is unknown. The second possibility was to present it by ethnic group. This form had much in its favour as it reflected the native reality, but once again the ethnic provenance of many objects is unknown.
The third way was by country. Although there are exceptions, in the majority of cases there is
no doubt about which modern South American country any particular object came from; accordingly that is the scheme selected to order this survey. Even so and as will be obvious, this has its drawbacks. The most serious of these is the fact that ethnic groups are not restricted to national territories but overlap frontiers. Where the bulk of a collection comes from one country and fewer items from the neighbouring territory, the latter have been included with the former.
The bulk of the collection is of an ethnographic nature. There is very little archaeological material which, not surprisingly, dominates the collections from the Andean and Pacific coastal regions. It should be mentioned, however, that this is not a genuine reflection of the tropical forest situation since there are museums, such as the Goeldi Museum in Belém do Pará, that hold collections of magnificent ceramics that should undoubtedly be classed as archaeological finds. The collections surveyed here are on the whole dominated by the following objects: hunting weapons, that is bows and arrows, blowpipes and their darts, and associated accessories; basketry objects which include as huge range of domestic objects including all those used in the processing of cassava, the staple crop through much of the region; musical instruments, particularly flutes; and feather ornaments, including elaborate headdresses and armbands. Also featuring strongly are pottery items, hammocks, clubs, and women’s bead or seed aprons. There are as well a number of more esoteric items such as shaman’s rattles and shrunken heads.