Section 3

The Question of Nanti Identity

So far we have been using the term "Nanti" to refer to the residents of Montetoni and Malanksiá, without discussion. By using the term "Nanti", we are at least implying that the residents of Montetoni and Malanksiá are in some meaningful sense distinct from their geographical neighbors, and their linguistic cousins, the Machiguenga. Whether this is in fact the case, however, is a matter of some disagreement among those involved with, or interested in, the Nanti. Though the question may on the surface appear to be a pedantic or academic one, we believe that this matter has profound implications for the issues of Nanti cultural, linguistic, and political autonomy.

The purpose of this section is to discuss this question. We begin by presenting our understanding of the Nanti perspective of who they are viz-a-viz the Machiguenga and the outside world in general. We then proceed to a discussion of Machiguenga attitudes towards the same matter, and conclude with our own analysis of the similarities and differences between the Machiguenga and Nanti, and discuss our conclusion that the Nanti constitute a distinct ethnic group from the Machiguenga. In Section 8 we present a discussion of the political aspects of this question.

3.1  Nanti Self-Identity

The issue of Nanti self-identity is a surprisingly subtle and complicated one, since the Nanti themselves do not hold an opinion on their identity viz-a-viz the Machiguenga that easily translates into our notions of distinct cultural or political units. Whereas Occidental cultures habitually categorize groups of people in terms of language, culture, and political alignment, the Nanti appear to divide people into groups based on their location and common interest, which may coincide with cultural or political groupings, or may not. This fact, coupled with the polysemy of the term "matsigenka" among the Nanti, makes direct questioning of the Nanti about their perception of their own distinctness from the Machiguenga, or lack thereof, a surprisingly fruitless course of action. Similarly, it is difficult to ask questions that reveal how they delimit the group of people to whom they belong.

If asked if they are "matsigenka", the Nanti will respond "ario, nanti matsigenka", that is, "indeed, I am a person." It would be an error, however, to conclude from this that the Nanti believe themselves to be "Machiguenga", in the sense used by anthropologists, or the Machiguenga themselves, to mean a specific culturally and linguistically delimited group of people.

A discussion of the meaning of the term "matsigenka" among the Nanti helps clarify the situation. At present the Nanti divide human beings into four groups: matsigenka, kogapakori, biracucha, and kwirink (the Nanti pronunciation of gringo). Diagram 1 shows the taxonomy of these terms. 



                                animate beings
                               /              \
                         matsigenka       non-humans
                        /          \
                  matsigenka    kogapakori
                 /          \
           matsigenka    biracucha
          /          \
    matsigenka     kwirink
Diagram 1


As one can see, "matsigenka" appears four times in the taxonomy, indicating that different distinctions are being made between "matsigenka" and "non-matsigenka" at each node. At the first node, the distinction being made is between human beings in a purely biological sense, and all other living beings. In this sense the Nanti, the downriver Machiguenga, Peruvians, and Europeans are all "matsigenka".

At the next node, a distinction is drawn between "matsigenka" and "kogapakori". The essence of this distinction lies in the fact that "kogapakori" are essentially hostile and are likely to kill "matsigenka" without provocation or obvious motive. Hence, the people who made attacks on the upper Timpia and a possibly hostile group they encountered at Piriasanti were both "kogapakori". It is permissible and even prudent to fire arrows at "kogapakori" on sight, as happened at Piriasanti, since they are likely to attack anyway. "Kogapakori" are the least trustworthy of the categories of human beings recognized by the Nanti, and should be avoided at all costs.

The next distinction that is made is between "matsigenka" and "biracucha", which rests on a number of distinct factors that seem intertwined in the minds of the Nanti: being of European descent, that is, not purely nativo; being unable to understand the Nanti language; being basically unsympathetic to Nanti concerns; and possessing items of "high" technology, such as machetes, axes, and metal pots. While Peruvian visitors are "biracucha" par excellence, one need not conform to all these criteria to be considered "biracucha". Thus the Machiguenga men who worked with Dominican padres on the Timpia, for example, were considered "biracucha" because their sympathies lay with the Dominicans; similarly, despite being nativo, the Quechua traders encountered by those Nanti who have traveled to the Urubamba are also called "biracucha". Most relevant, though, to the distinction between "matsigenka" and "biracucha" is the lack of mutual intelligibility. As we discuss below, "kwirink" are considered "matsigenka" in the sense presently under discussion, as opposed to "biracucha," due to their (at times limited) capacity to converse in Nanti. The Asháninka encountered by a Nanti man being treated for tuberculosis in Kirigueti were classified as "matsigenka" due to the similarity of their language to his own.

The final distinction, between "matsigenka" and "kwirink", is a recent one, and has been precipitated by our stay among the Nanti. This term applies not only to ourselves, but also seems to be used retroactively to refer to the Summer Institute of Linguistics [Spanish: Instituto Lingüístico de Verano] workers who visited Malanksiá in February of 1997. Although "kwirink" and "biracucha" are similar in many ways, "kwirink" are distinct from "biracucha" because of their ability to converse in Nanti to some degree, their generosity with tools and medicine, and their general interest in Nanti welfare, language and culture. The majority of the Nanti now seem to see "kwirink" as the most friendly of all the above groups, and even as allies of a sort. It is interesting to note that the term "kwirink", in the form "gringo", was introduced either by Silverio or his son Rudi as a term of mockery or denigration, but the only Nanti who have picked up on this sense of the term are a small number of young people in the downriver community of Malanksiá, mostly those in the school. The Nanti apparently do not employ insults, and so instead of using "gringo" as an insult, they have come to use it as a term to distinguish a certain group of people.

At any rate, interpreting the Nanti answer, "Nanti matsigenka" as meaning "I am a Machiguenga" is clearly incorrect, as the term "matsigenka" is operating on another level of meaning in this context than the term "Machiguenga", used by outsiders. The Nanti's answer "Nanti matsigenka" is a declaration of humanity and morality, not of group affiliation. To ask the question "Are you Machiguenga?" in the latter sense, that is in the sense in which outsiders, and especially linguists and anthropologists, use the term Machiguenga to distinguish a particular language and cultural grouping, is not even possible in the above taxonomy. At this point, these types of distinctions are not yet culturally salient for the Nanti; what largely matters to them is where people actually live and if they hold common interests.

This also makes identifying other "Nanti" difficult. The only words that exist in Nanti that come close identifying members of a common group are noshaninka, pishaninka, ishaninka, and oshaninka, which translate roughly as "my, your, his, and her neighbor or companion". What the word noshaninka, for example, serves to indicate is that the person indicated by that term lives with the speaker and shares a relationship of trust and mutual reciprocity. For example, we were told on a number of occasions by the Montetoni Nanti that José Arisha and Silverio Araña came from Chokoriari, and were not their noshaninka. That is, although these Machiguenga lived among them, they were not part of the network of mutual trust that make the Camisea Nanti a group. Similarly, Machiguenga from other communities, such as Cashiriari and Segakiato, were not their noshaninka.

At first this seems like a possible solution to the problem of how to delimit the "Nanti" in a manner parallel to Occidental notions of ethnicity. Unfortunately, if the Montetoni Nanti are asked if the "matsigenka of Marientari" are their noshaninka, the answer they give is "tea" -- "no". However, the Marientari Nanti are more culturally and linguistically similar to the Camisea Nanti than any other group of people on Earth.

In summary, the Nanti way of categorizing people is fundamentally different from that employed by the Occidental world and those influenced by Occidental taxonomies; it is ignorant of the distinctions, such as ethnicity, that we emphasize. As we have indicated, location of residence, and common interest are the most salient taxonomic features. The Machiguenga of Segakiato are referred to as "the matsigenka of Segakiato", the Peruvians of Sepahua are referred to as "the matsigenka of Sepahua", the Americans we know who live in Lima are "the matsigenka of Lima" -- and the Nanti of present-day Marientari are simply "the matsigenka of Marientari". There is no such concept as "Machiguenga" or "Nanti" in the minds of the Nanti, as we use these terms.

The manner in which the Nanti categorize groups of people is an indication of the degree of isolation the Nanti still experience; they have not yet developed a taxonomy that recognizes the Machiguenga as more similar to them than the Asháninka, nor the people in Marientari as any more like them than anyone else on Earth. Outsiders such as mestizos and Quechua are lumped into a common category, but one that excludes certain white people of European descent.

The explicit categories that the Nanti employ are not particularly useful to the outsider who wishes to understand the Nanti conception of who is Nanti and who is non-Nanti, or if the Nanti consider themselves to be Machiguenga. But other, indirect, evidence exists that gives clues to these questions. These clues come from Nanti statements about what people they consider as appropriate husbands for the women of Montetoni and Malanksiá. As we discuss in greater detail in Section 8, all the adult Machiguenga males who have moved to the Nanti communities on the Camisea have taken either Nanti wives or concubines. Silverio Araña has taken two, and his son Rudi, his brother-in-law Ignacio, and José Arisha have each taken one also. This has caused a great deal of resentment, among the Montetoni Nanti at least, who were much more open with us about their disaffection with the Machiguenga than those Nanti in Malanksiá.

There has been a great deal of intermarriage between the previously distinct Nanti family groups on the Timpia, and we have never noted any problems associated with women of one family group marrying the men from another. Even on the Timpia, such marriage exchanges took place without tensions arising. The men of Montetoni made it very clear, however, that they resented the fact that the Machiguenga men living among them had taken Nanti women as their wives or concubines. They also made it clear that they wanted no other Machiguenga men -- that is, men from Segakiato, Chokoriari, etc. -- to come to live in Montetoni, since they fear losing more women to them. On the other hand, the men from one of the Marientari family groups which has moved to Montetoni are apparently welcome to have wives from among the women in Montetoni. This suggests that the Camisea Nanti make a distinction between men who are welcome to marry their women and those who are not. Those who are not, include the Machiguenga, biracucha, and kwirinks. Those who are, include the Nanti residents of Montetoni and Malanksiá, and those men from one of the family groups presently resident in Marientari, who have moved to Montetoni.

The manner in which these boundaries are drawn suggest a conception of an "in" group, at least for marriage purposes, that corresponds to our notion of the ethnic boundaries of the Nanti. Although this boundary does not have an overt verbal expression, it appears to be very real to the Camisea Nanti.

Another example supports the notion that the Nanti conceive of themselves as distinct from the Machiguenga, despite the lack of means to express this idea overtly. As we discuss in Section 4.5, there came a point during our 1997 visit to Montetoni when Silverio Araña, the Machiguenga schoolteacher living in Malanksiá, insisted that we leave. The Montetoni Nanti, on the other hand, wished us to stay, and told us this on many occasions. In view of the present discussion what is relevant, is the manner in which they indicated that we needn't listen to Silverio. They told us that "hala nokamantaigsempi piatai, nonkantaigse kameti pipokaig aka Montetonikwi, kameti pinakse. Irio iponiakse Chokoriarikwi, tea iponiakse Timpiakwi, tea yapatoitakse kala. Hala pikseme itya ikanti piatai." That is, "We will not tell you to leave, we say it is good you came, and good that you stay. He [Silverio] came from Chokoriari, he did not come from Timpia, he did not live with us there. You should not listen, when he tells you to leave."

What is significant is that in this statement, the Montetoni Nanti are saying that Silverio cannot speak for them, since he came from elsewhere, and, as a result, is not part of the group. Although Silverio lives with the Nanti, he cannot speak as a Nanti. Similar comments about the other Machiguenga indicate that the Nanti feel that the Machiguenga belong to a sufficiently distinct group of people that they do not have the right to speak for the Nanti.

What we can say at this point is that although the Nanti lack words to easily render explicit their conception of who they are, that is, to what larger group of people the residents of Montetoni and Malanksiá pertain, and although the taxonomy by which they classify people may on the surface suggest that they consider themselves Machiguenga, there is good reason to believe that at the very least the Nanti consider themselves to be politically distinct and autonomous from the Machiguenga. We do not believe that even the Nanti themselves have yet come to a decision about the more abstract issue of cultural identity with respect to the Machiguenga.

3.2  Machiguenga Attitudes Towards Nanti Identity

From the time that friendly contact was made between the Camisea Nanti and the Machiguenga in the late 1980s, the Machiguenga have come to play an increasingly prominent role in the lives of the Camisea Nanti and have also mediated most interactions between the Nanti and non-Machiguenga. For these two reasons, the Machiguenga attitude towards the question of Nanti identity is of great importance, as it both guides and justifies Machiguenga involvement with the Nanti, and also directly affects the involvement of non-Machiguenga with the Camisea Nanti.

The Machiguenga have told stories of "Kogapakori" -- referring to the little-contacted or uncontacted Arawakan groups of the headwaters regions of the Camisea, Timpia, Ticumpinea, and Manu rivers -- for at least the past several decades. These "Kogapakori" were generally considered to be "savage" or "primitive" Machiguenga. At least some of these "Kogapakori", though quite possibly not all, are members of the group we now call the Nanti. "Kogapakori", it should be noted, is a term that means, roughly, "killers", "killing people", or "savages"1.

Although we cannot be sure why the "Kogapakori" were believed to be simply "savage" Machiguenga, it is very likely that linguistic similarity played a role. It is also a very real possibility that the term "Kogapakori" was used to refer to both isolated Machiguenga groups as well as other Arawakan groups less closely related to the Machiguenga, and it was simply assumed that all the "Kogapakori" were simply isolated Machiguenga. Regardless of the origin of this belief, it is very widespread among the Machiguenga.

This belief has been further enforced by most of the Machiguenga involved with the Nanti. Silverio Araña especially has been very insistent on classifying the Nanti as Machiguenga. Not long after his arrival among the Nanti, Silverio began to refer to the Nanti as "Kogapakori Machiguenga", thereby indicating his belief that although they are in some sense different from the downriver Machiguenga, the Nanti are nevertheless a Machiguenga subgroup. This name for the residents of the upper Camisea is odd in two respects. One is that the Nanti consider it terribly insulting to be referred to as "kogapakori", and the second, is that "Kogapakori Machiguenga" is an oxymoron in the eyes of the Nanti themselves, as we discuss in Section 3.1.

In about 1996, the term "Nanti", which we now employ, came into use. We are not sure who coined it, but it may well have been Angel Diaz. The term "Nanti" has the obvious advantage of not being insulting to those so named and it also indicates that at least to some of the Machiguenga, the residents of the upper Rio Camisea are not merely "killers", but a people. Silverio now employs the term "Nanti Machiguenga", once again asserting that the Nanti are essentially a Machiguenga subgroup.

While the perception of the Nanti as simply "primitive" Machiguenga is prevalent, we have encountered two notable exceptions: Edgar Barrientos and Angel Diaz. Edgar Barrientos is the director of the bilingual Machiguenga teachers of the lower Urubamba, and as such, is Silverio's direct superior. Angel Diaz is a Machiguenga evangelist and the leader of the Maranatha church and bible school in Nuevo Mundo, who has visited Montetoni and Malanksiá on many occasions. Both acknowledge, principally on linguistic grounds, that the Nanti form a group distinct from the Machiguenga. We believe Edgar came to this point of view because of the almost complete failure of Silverio's educational efforts among the Camisea Nanti. Apparently Silverio has explained some of his difficulties as being due to the unsuitability of the Machiguenga texts he has available for educating the Nanti, and Edgar has concluded from this that the Nanti are not Machiguenga, though probably closely related. Angel Diaz is interested in creating a Nanti translation of the New Testament, so he too has paid attention to the linguistic differences between the Nanti and Machiguenga, and concluded that the difference is sufficiently great that the Machiguenga New Testament would not be suitable for the Nanti. Apart from recognizing the linguistic dissimilarity of the Nanti and Machiguenga, Angel has also expressed concern about the cultural and political autonomy of the Nanti viz-a-viz the Machiguenga, recognizing that the perception that the Nanti are simply "uncivilized Machiguenga", represents a threat to the unique identity, culture, and freedom of the Nanti.

It is important to realize that the question of Nanti identity, though it may seem academic or pedantic on the surface, is one of great importance to the future of the Nanti and the nature of Machiguenga involvement with the Nanti. Silverio, for example, takes a rhetorical stance with respect to his involvement with the Nanti that depends heavily on the Nanti being essentially Machiguenga. Silverio has stated that since the Nanti are "uncivilized" Machiguenga, and he is a "civilized" Machiguenga, he knows what is best for the Nanti -- better than the Nanti themselves and certainly better than any non-Machiguenga. By classifying the Nanti as Machiguenga, he is able to justify his coercive and abusive actions with respect to the Nanti as actions of a member of the "enlightened" branch of the Machiguenga correcting the errors and faults of an "unenlightened" branch, namely the Nanti. Not only does this stance, in his eyes, justify whatever actions he takes with respect to the Nanti, but it also allows him to reject the involvement of any non-Machiguenga with the Nanti as interference in internal Machiguenga affairs. In short, Silverio's assertion that the Nanti as simply "savage" or "primitive" Machiguenga provides him with a rhetorical position that simultaneously justifies his having a free hand with the Nanti and justifies his rejection of any outside monitoring of his behavior among the Nanti.

Although Silverio represents an extreme case, the belief that the Nanti are nothing more that "uncivilized Machiguenga" has led to a widespread belief among the Machiguenga that the Nanti need to become "civilized", like the downriver Machiguenga, and that the Machiguenga alone should be involved with the Nanti. Unfortunately, becoming "civilized" means, to many Machiguenga, that the Nanti should learn to speak "proper" Machiguenga, adopt a "proper" Machiguenga kinship structure, and generally speaking, culturally assimilate into mainriver Machiguenga culture. This attitude threatens the integrity of the unique culture and language of the Nanti. That the Nanti should be left entirely to the Machiguenga is also a troublesome stance. As we discuss in Sections 8, many of those Machiguenga who have had direct involvement with the Camisea Nanti have shown little restraint in taking advantage of the Nanti, in ways ranging from taking Nanti women to using Nanti labor without recompense. We believe that this willingness to take advantage of the Nanti stems largely from the belief among the Machiguenga that the Nanti, being "primitive Machiguenga", are a resource that "civilized Machiguenga" have a right to exploit.

3.3  The Authors' Analysis of the Question of Nanti Identity

Although most Machiguenga, and therefore many non-Machiguenga, assert that the Nanti are essentially a Machiguenga subgroup, the authors of this report reject this conclusion. We argue that the Nanti are a distinct ethnic group, identifiable in terms of concrete linguistic and cultural features that identify them as separate from the Machiguenga.

Our assertion that the Nanti are distinct from the Machiguenga is based on two well-supported claims. The first is that the languages of the Nanti and the Machiguenga, while similar, are distinct. Both Nanti and Machiguenga are Pre-Andine Arawakan languages, a family of languages that includes Asháninka, Nomatsiguenga, Piro, and Amuesha, among others. Within the Pre-Andine Arawakan language family exists a subgroup of languages commonly called the Campa languages, of which Machiguenga and Nanti are members, along with Asháninka, Ashéninka, Nomatsiguenga, and Caquinte. The Campan languages are closely related, and speakers of one Campan language are usually able to understand to some degree, though sometimes a slight degree, the speakers of another Campan language. One might argue that the different Campan languages are simply dialects of a single language, but linguists judge the above Campan languages, setting aside Nanti for the moment, to be distinct. One of the simplest criteria for this judgment is the question of mutual intelligibility. That is, can the speakers of two possibly different languages easily converse with one another? If they cannot, there is good reason to classify the two languages as distinct. For example, 85% of Portuguese words have Spanish cognates, and the grammatical structures of the two languages are very similar. Nevertheless, Spanish speakers cannot easily understand Portuguese speakers, and thus the two languages are considered distinct.

By the criterion of mutual intelligibility, Nanti and Machiguenga must be considered distinct languages. Most of the Machiguenga we have spoken to about the intelligibility of Nanti say that they have difficulty in understanding it, but they feel that a few months exposure to the language would probably be enough to make Nanti intelligible to them. They say that the two languages are very similar. On the other hand, we have other evidence that suggests that this may be an overly optimistic appraisal of the situation.

Silverio, for example, says that when he first arrived among the Nanti he had great difficulty in communicating with them, and he admitted to us in July of 1997 that he still had communication problems with the Nanti, and this after living among the Nanti for six years. Furthermore, it appears that the level of comprehension that the other Machiguenga living among the Nanti have of their language is quite low. Interestingly, when asked, these same Machiguenga -- Ignacio (Silverio's brother-in-law), and José Arisha, the promotor de salud -- will claim that they have a perfect understanding of Nanti. The manner in which we discovered this to be false is instructive.

When we first arrived in Malanksiá in June of 1997, one of the most important tasks before us was to learn Nanti. We decided to begin by enlisting the help of Ignacio and José, both of whom speak rudimentary Spanish, and who were willing to help us in exchange for the salary we offered. Our plan was to begin by taping interviews with the Nanti, using José and Ignacio as translators. We would transcribe these interviews and analyze them, beginning with vocabulary and then moving on to more complex matters, with the help of José and Ignacio, who could translate into Spanish those parts of the transcripts we found difficult. Much to our disappointment, this plan failed. The basic problem was that José and Ignacio had a very difficult time translating small sections of Nanti speech. Given a large section -- two minutes of speech, for example -- they could provide a brief summary, but translation of individual words or small sets of words was mostly beyond them. What we realized was that although they could extract the general meaning of a portion of a conversation, they were hard-pressed to understand more specifically what was being said.

From the vantage point of our present understanding of Machiguenga and Nanti, it is clear why we had the experience we had with José and Ignacio; although Machiguenga and Nanti differ substantially in phonology, certain aspects of the grammar, and discourse styles, they share a substantial number of verb stems, a central part of the Campan languages. By being able to recognize verb stems, Ignacio and José were able to get the general idea of a long stretch of speech, even though the details were lost to them. We ourselves were able to adopt a similar strategy during the early phases of our learning of Nanti. It should be noted that Ignacio has lived among the Nanti for almost as long as Silverio himself, and José has done so since early 1995. Thus, despite living among the Nanti for years, these two Machiguenga still suffer substantial difficulties in understanding Nanti.

This conclusion bore itself out in detail when we were eventually able to make our own translation of the interviews we performed with José and Ignacio. We were able to see that there was a great deal of misunderstanding, especially on the part of the Machiguenga speaker. It appears that the Nanti speaker had an easier time understanding the Machiguenga speaker than visa versa. Such one-way intelligibility exists between other pairs of languages. Speakers of Brazilian Portuguese, for example, find it much easier to understand speakers of South American Spanish than the other way around.

We argue, then, that on the criterion of easy mutual intelligibility, Nanti and Machiguenga cannot be considered the same language. It must be admitted that the mutual intelligibility criterion is somewhat vague, and to a certain degree it is a matter of linguistic taste where one draws the line between two dialects of a single language, and two distinct languages. Nevertheless, it is the provisional opinion of the authors that the difference between Nanti and Machiguenga is on the same order of magnitude as the difference between Asháninka and Machiguenga, which are considered distinct languages by linguists.

Our second reason for arguing that the Nanti are an ethnically distinct group from the Machiguenga is that a great many aspects of Nanti culture differ substantially from the corresponding aspects of Machiguenga culture. To begin, consider the physical culture of the two groups. There are a number of significant elements of Machiguenga physical culture that are traditionally entirely absent in Nanti physical culture:
  1. Manufacture and use of dugout canoes
  2. Cultivation of cotton, and the associated manufacture of cushmas
  3. Cultivation and use of barbasco [Machiguenga: kogi]
  4. Manufacture and use of musical instruments, specifically flutes and drums
  5. Decorative use of feathers, especially in head dresses
  6. Manufacture and use of fishing nets [Machiguenga: shiriti]
  7. Construction of dwellings with either walls or raised floors
More significantly, there are substantial differences in the central ideological and metaphysical facets of Nanti and Machiguenga culture. Whereas the Machiguenga have a complex and highly developed system of metaphysical and spiritual belief that includes an elaborate system of beneficent and malevolent supernatural beings, as well as human heroes, all described in a vast collection of myths2, the Nanti have no such comparable system or mythology. Similarly, as we discuss in Section 6.5, the Nanti employ no medicinal plants or healing practices, and have no curing specialists; again, these practices are highly developed among the Machiguenga. The cultural role of women among the Nanti is also strikingly different from that among the Machiguenga traditionally. In the context of Machiguenga metaphysical beliefs, women, especially during menstruation, are spiritually unclean, and women are confined to a distinct dwelling during their menstrual period. No such tradition exists among the Nanti, and there is no evidence of women having a special "unclean" status.

At our present state of knowledge, there is little compelling evidence to suggest a close cultural affinity between the Machiguenga and Nanti. This, combined with the level of linguistic dissimilarity between the two groups, justifies, in our eyes, considering the Nanti to be distinct from the Machiguenga.

Before we close this section, it is important to note from that from the outset the question of Nanti identity has a significant political dimension. If the Nanti are indeed a Machiguenga subgroup, as many Machiguenga claim, this position provides both justification and motivation for Machiguenga involvement among the Nanti. Machiguenga actions can be represented as those of the civilized, advanced, and knowledgeable portion of a people helping their less fortunate brethren -- a rhetorical stance taken by Silverio and many other Machiguenga we have spoken with; please also refer to Section 8. This position can also be used to justify Machiguenga actions opposed by the Nanti -- the Machiguenga, as the civilized branch of a common people, know what is good for the uncivilized branch, and therefore the Machiguenga are justified in carrying out actions for the good of the Nanti, regardless of Nanti dissatisfaction with such actions. In an important sense it also makes the Nanti a Machiguenga concern, to be settled by the Machiguenga, thereby justifying the exclusion of non-Machiguenga from affairs concerning the Nanti.

On the other hand, to maintain that the Nanti are distinct from the Machiguenga is a potentially volatile one, since it may call in to question the justifications employed by the Machiguenga, especially Silverio, in his dealings with the Nanti. To argue for the distinctness of the Nanti is to suggest, at least implicitly, that they deserve a measure of autonomy from the Machiguenga, especially as represented by Silverio.

1 The Nanti are hardly the first people to be referred to as "Kogapakori" by the Machiguenga. Padre José Pío Aza, a Dominican priest who worked among the Machiguenga in both the Madre de Dios and Urubamba regions during the first decades of this century, mentions that both the Asháninka and the Harakmbet-language speaking peoples (also known as "Mashcos") were referred to as "Kogapakori" by the Machiguenga who lived near them. See p. 31, Padre José Pío Aza, Vocabulario español-machiguenga.

2 For a discussion of this and other issues we raise about Machiguenga culture, see G. Baer, Cosmologia y Shamanismo do Los Matsiguenga (Peru Oriental).