ANTHROPOLOGICAL RECORDS 21:2 A SURVEY OF PERUVIAN FISHING COMMUNITIES BY E. A. HAMMEL AND YNEZ D. HAASE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS BERKELEY AND LOS ANGELES - 1962 A SURVEY OF PERUVIAN FISHING COMMUNITIES BY E. A. HAMMEL AND YNEZ D. HAASE ANTHROPOLOGICAL RECORDS Vol. 2I, No. 2 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLICATIONS ANTHROPOLOGICAL RECORDS Editors (Berkeley): J. H. Rowe, D. H. Hymes, J. D. Clark Volume 21, No. 2, pp. 211-230, 5 figures in text, 1 map Submitted by editors May 29, 1962 Issued December 7, 1962 Price, 75 cents University of California Press Berkeley and Los Angeles California Cambridge University Press London, England Manufactured in the United States of America CONTENTS Page Introduction ................................................ 211 General Characteristics of Fishing Communities ....................................... 212 The Technology of Fishing . ................................................ 214 Marine Products Taken . ................................................ 214 Nets ................................................ 214 Traps ......................................................................... 218 Hook-and-line Fishing ........................................................... 218 Spears, Gaffs, and Miscellaneous Artifacts . ....................................... 218 Water Craft .................................................................... 219 Knots and Splices .......... ...................................... 221 Role Differentiation and Economic Arrangements ....................................... 222 Manufacture of Equipment ................................................ 222 M arketing ...................................................................... 222 Profit Sharing ................................................ 222 Sexual Division of Labor ................................................ 222 Summary and Conclusions ............. ................................... 223 Appendix: Descriptions of Some Communities .......................................... 225 Bibliography ......................................................................... 228 Figures in Text 1. Red de cortina ..................... ..................... 215 2. Chinchorros ................................................................. 217 3. Caballitos del mar .................... 220 4. Bote de vela (Pisco) ....................................................... . 221 5. Zapato chalana (Cerro Azul) .................. .................... 221 Map 1 Peruvian fishing communities surveyL-d .................................... facing 211 [ iii I I Map 1. Peruvian fishing communities surveyed. A 4- Q loreo lo A SURVEY OF PERUVIAN FISHING COMMUNITIES BY E. A. HAMMEL AND YNEZ D. HAASE INTRODUCTION One of the least known areas of mestizo culture in Latin America centers around the organization and operation of coastal fishing communities. The lack of information is the more disturbing in Peru because of the close association of a fishing eco- nomy with the earliest recorded horticulture in the area and the importance of maritime activities in the development of aboriginal culture. The domesti- cation of certain plants (e.g., lima beans, achira, lucuma, avocado, pacae, cotton, and gourds) may have been accomplished or accepted by coastal fishermen as early as 2500 B. C. It is of further interest that the earliest evidence of domesticated plants includes cotton and gourds, which were employed not for subsistence but for industrial purposes in the basic fishing economy, that is, for the making of lines, nets, and net floats.' The clear importance of a developed fishing economy to the rise of civilization in Peru and the probable continued role of maritime operations in trade throughout the whole span of Peruvian civilization are in strong contrast to the fact that little of the presumed aboriginal heritage of fishing and navigational techniques can be identified as surviving today.2 The cultural inventory, terminol- ogy, techniques, and sociology of Peruvian coastal fishing are apparently overwhelmingly Spanish, covered with an overlay of later European and North American introductions. Scholarly opinion dif- fers somewhat on the precise nature of the histori- cal processes involved. Foster (1960: 77-86) points out that traditional Spanish fishing is among the most highly developed of such complexes in the world (see also Rodriguez Santamaria, 1927). Sug- gesting that little of the variety of Iberian equip- ment and techniques is to be found in Peru or other coastal areas of Mestizo America, he mini- mizes the presence of aboriginal forms as well as the effect of more recent diffusion. Murphy 'For discussion of the aboriginal background, see Bird, 1946; Bennett and Bird, 1949: 116-123; Estrada, 1957: 11 (citing Oviedo), 47-56 (citing Dampier, Baleato); Schweigger, 1943: 252 (citing Cieza de Le6n); Lothrop, 1932; Means, 1942; Garcilaso, 1945; Cobo, 1956; Vasquez de Espinosa, 1948; Kostritsky, 1955; Engel, 1957; Lanning, MS; Edwards, MS, 1960. ?For comments on the probable role of navigation, see Willey, 1955: 42; Coe, 1960. On techniques of navigation, see Lothrop, 1932; Means, 1942; Edwards, MS, 1960. (1925: 214-215), on the other hand, regards coastal Peruvian fishing as a somewhat reduced set of aboriginal techniques with a few more recent (prin- cipally Italian) elements added, ignoring the extent and detail of Iberian introductions, with which he may not have been, in fact, familiar. We shall attempt to show in this paper that both these ori- entations are indeed correct, but that they apply to different segments of the cultural inventory. If one examines nets and the sociology of fishing, Foster's opinion appears generally correct. If one examines vessel types ahistorically and takes ac- count of the date of Murphy's work the opposite is the case. This study, however, is not offered as a final solution to the culture-historical prob- lem of how aboriginal Peruvian fishing has been transformed over the years into its modern forms. It is, rather, an attempt to add to that body of data which will be necessary for the solution of the prob- lem and to offer suggestions which seem legitimate in terms of the information currently available. The survey on which this paper is based was undertaken in 1957-1958 and covered the Peruvian coast from Ica to the Ecuadorean border.3 Inform- ants were consulted in thirty-seven villages, and data were obtained on ten more, either by personal observation or by questioning informants in other localities. The rapidity of the survey (5,000 kms. in 10 days) and the difficulties of establishing rap- port with so many informants in a short time make superficiality of the data inevitable (we were sus- pected by most fishermen of being either tax col- lectors or of spying out new fishing grounds for the commercial fishing companies with which they are in continual conflict). We can only hope that breadth of coverage will compensate for that fault in some degree, and that the information presented will serve as a guide for further investigation. 3This survey was undertaken by the authors after comparison of field notes from their respective areas (Hammel in Ica, Haase in Sechura) indicated that investigation of the intervening areas would be advisable. Hammel's research was done with the sup- port of the Social Science Research Council, Haase's with that of the Geography Branch, Office of Naval Research. The authors are grateful to their respective sponsors for their support. We are also obliged to G. M. Foster for his comments and advice while the field research was in progress and to him and J. H. Rowe for comments on a draft of this paper. [ 211 ] GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF FISHING COMMUNITIES The 43 settlements on which some demographic information was available have an approximate total population of 23,000 persons dependent to a major degree on, and directly involved in, fishing (see Ap- pendix). (Schweigger, 1943: 264 and Fiedler, 1943: 63 give roughly comparable figures.) Settlements range in population from a dozen to 5,000 inhabitants; the mean is about 535 but the modal only 200 persons. The distribution is thus markedly skewed; only 5 com- munities have a population of over 1,000. Few of the settlements and individuals treated here are involved primarily in fishing for commercial canneries or pro- cessing factories; thus, segments of the fishing popu- lation of some large coastal cities (e.g., Callao) are omitted. Nevertheless, it should be stressed that much of the catching of fish for consumption without inter- mediate processing, or perhaps for drying and salting, is distinctly commercial, not subsistence, in nature, and it is the larger communities among those con- sidered which are most extensively involved in fish- ing for the market. (See Cobo, 1956, I: 299 and Vas- quez de Espinosa, 1948: 371, 462, for comments on commercial fishing during the colonial period, and Raimondi, 1942, I:88, 189, for remarks on the repub- lican period.) Only the smallest communities (popula- tion under 100) engage in fishing primarily as a sub- sistence technique; of these there are about a dozen. Except for the larger communities, fishing villages tend to be more conservative and poorer than the average coastal agricultural settlement. Houses are predominantly of wattle-and-daub (quincha) or just of cane, as were many of their aboriginal prototypes. The relative lack of adobe in fishing-village construc- tion is a function not only of the lack of materials on the arid and often sandy locales of the settlements, of the seasonal and camplike character of some, but also of the poverty of many of the communities, since quincha construction is commonest in poorer houses everywhere on the coast. Adherence to traditional medical practices and to Iberian-derived food taboos is strong in fishing villages, but there is little in the data gathered to indicate special supernatural beliefs relating to fishing and to the sea. (The standard cor- pus of "magical" reference in many areas is, in fact, the Bristol Almanac, and possibly important phenomena such as the phases of the moon are considered only with respect to their effect on the tides and the light they provide.) Fraternal organizations (gremios) seem to be relatively unimportant today, although they some- times support a local saint; the elaborate functions of the Iberian fishermen's organizations appear to be ab- sent. (However, Fiedler, 1943:64, 1944:114-115, reports gremios with memberships ranging from 15 to more than 1,000 and functions similar to some of those of Iberian gremios.) Social relationships within and between fishing com- munities and between these and neighboring settlements vary widely in detail. The authority structure of the fishing population as such is largely informal, although each village of any size has a local official, the sargento, whose duty it is to enforce regulations pertaining to fishing practices and the registration and operation of vessels, and to report infractions to the capitania under the jurisdiction of which his village falls. (The sargento and the official superstructure above him thus perform some of the regulative functions of the Iberian fishermen's gremio; cf. Foster, 1960:84, on its decline in Spain.) Sargentos are appointed by the capitania of the nearest large port; for example, the sargento of Laguna Grande is appointed by and is res- ponsible to the capitania of Pisco. In some villages the fishermen claim thA they elect their sargento; it seems, in fact, that they elect a candidate who is ap- proved by the capitania, but final authority rests with that office. The position of the sargento in enforcing the law is a difficult one, since he is one of the vil- lagers but nevertheless responsible to an outside and somewhat foreign authority. As a result, infractions by his personal friends are seldom noted, while those by his enemies are frequently reported. The office thus serves as a focal point for local factionalism which is exploited by the sargento and by the capitania. (Unfortunately, we have no data on the relationships between the capitania, the sargentos, and the gremios, where the latter exist.) Larger fishing communities are often rather self- contained in matters of marriage and compadrazgo and may have their own market to which fish buyers come. Smaller communities often form a social clus- ter around the large ones; thus men in small fishing villages may have many relatives, including affines, in a major fishing center nearby. Neighboring fishing villages are socially tied together, but the ties seldom extend for a great distance, and there is no strong solidarity of fishermen as opposed to farmers along the coast, except occasionally on a local level. indeed, some agricultural communities are closely tied to neighboring fishing villages. Marriages are contracted freely between the two kinds of settlements, and many fishermen maintain dual residence, spending part of the year farming and the rest fishing. The combination of farming and fishing reflects the aboriginal dual eco- nomy and is most evident today at two locales on the coast-Laguna Grande (near Ica) and Sechura. The relationships in these communities are of sufficient interest to warrant more detailed description. (See also Gillin's account of Huanchaco and of the relation- ships between Las Delicias and Moche, 1947:28-31). The fishing village of Laguna Grande, at the north end of the Bahia de la Independencia, has a constant minimum population of about 60 people and a peak population during the summer of about 300 persons. Almost all the seasonal population comes from the single village of Comatrana, just outside the city of Ica; Laguna Grande is, in fact, an outpost of Coma- trana. Some of the permanent fishermen at Laguna Grande have land in the Ica Valley which is tended by relatives or rented out; the temporary fishermen come to the coastal outpost in the slack period before the annual floods are due (these occur between late December and early March). The middlemen and buyers (compradores) who pick up fish at Laguna Grande and transport it in trucks to Ica, or even to Lima, are almost all from Comatrana. The close [ 212 1 HAMMEL AND HAASE: PERUVIAN FISHING COMMUNITIES relationship between the agricultural and the fishing community is illustrated in some curious ways; for example, the favorite tool for scraping hulls and collecting certain shellfish at Laguna Grande is the farmer's lampa (spade), for collecting other shell- fish, a rake. The associational pattern is the tradi- tional one in this area, as it probably is at other places on the coast. Informants in the valley reported that as recently as a generation ago many farmers, particularly from the southern end of the cultivated zone (Ocucaje-Callango), spent the period before the annual floods in fishing and drying the catch and were summoned back to their fields by runner when the water came. It is of some interest that the association between Laguna Grande and Comatrana has been strengthened in recent years by improved (truck) transportation. What was a fourteen-hour trip can now be made in two or three hours. Since Laguna Grande is a dry camp, greater quantities of water can now be brought to it, allowing a larger permanent or seasonal population, and the catch can be transported more quickly to market. The situation near Sechura is a similar one. Al- most all the inhabitants of Sechura are fishermen or fishermen-farmers, and they or their relatives ex- ploit marine resources in a series of neighboring villages-for example, Matacaballo, Constante, Para- chique, and Chulliyache. (Many of the fishermen in the Negritos-Pizarro zone are also of Sechuran descent; see Appendix.) It is of some interest that these very traditional villages near Sechura are the only locales encountered on the coast at which some aboriginal coastal speech may still exist. When ques- tioned about puzzling features of their dialect, the fishermen declined to comment; to the best of our knowledge and powers of discrimination, however, they were employing a series of non-Spanish and non-Quechua words, together with Spanish vocabulary, in a Spanish syntactical framework. They were, of course, quite capable of speaking the standard local Sparlish as well, and shifted to it as soon as they were questioned about their speech; evidently they were aware of the distinctions involved. (Our obser- vations were confirmed by the comments of Rosa Fung de Lanning, in personal communication, and by the nineteenth-century remarks of Middendorf, 1894, II:414-417.) A third village which presents an interesting pattern of association with the agricultural population is Los Chinos (near Nepenia). Informants there said that they were almost all from the area of Huaraz, in the Calle- j6n de Huaylas, and that regular contact was main- tained with their home area. One of the commonest names in the village is Huamanchumu, close to the "Huamanchumo" recorded by Gillin (1947:51, 103) as a family name of "true Huanchaqueros" and also as a Moche patronym ([o] and [u ] occur in free varia- tion word-finally in the Spanish dialect of many native Quechua speakers). In view of the informants' state- ments of their own origin and Gillin' s analysis of local patronyms not far to the north, the associational pattern between the coast and the Callej6n may prove to be an old one. Such a conclusion would, indeed, be supported by ceramic evidence from the Moche and Recuay aboriginal cultures (see Larco Hoyle, 1960). Further evidence for coastal-sierran relations comes from the Chiclayo-Sechura coastal zone, which is seasonally visited by serranos, who come down to fish (C. Edwards, personal communication). Thus, there is a persistence in some areas of the close aboriginal farmer- fisher relationship which seems to have been disturbed in other regions by the increased commercialization of fishing and gradual incorporation of fishing activities into a separate and independent economic sphere. The disruption is, of course, greatest in zones of those major commercial enterprises in which marine products are canned or processed into fertilizer. On the other hand, modern means of transportation have allowed intensification of fishing activities by fishermen-farmers when the product was designed for direct market sale, or for traditional drying and salting and subsequent sale, when other conditions were favorable. All available evidence seems to indicate that the disruptions date from a period no earlier than the middle 1800's and that they are attri- butable in large part to an influx of Italian entrepreneurs (and possibly fishermen as well) about that time. As noted, there are still some small villages in which fishing is the primary and perhaps almost the sole subsistence activity (e.g., Jahuay); this, too, may be a remnant of an early pattern of isolated fishing hamlets in areas in which horticulture was marginal or perhaps impossible (e.g., the aboriginal remains in northern Chile [Bird, 1946]). 213 THE TECHNOLOGY OF FISHING MARINE PRODUCTS TAKEN More than one hundred varieties of fish, sea mam- mals, turtles, and a number of invertebrates and plants are customarily fished or gathered along the Peruvian coast, attesting the excellence of the fishing waters. Without detailed investigation by a competent biologist, it is impossible to provide an accurate list of marine animals and plants encountered and de- scribed on this survey, since they were recorded by their local names. The variety of such names is con- fusing; the same term will be applied to different forms in different areas, and, conversely, different terms will sometimes be applied to the same form. It is therefore of little value to attempt a catalogue here of the fauna and flora exploited (for faunal lists see Hildebrand, 1946; Peru, 1950-56; Fiedler, 1943:24- 28; Murphy, 1925:227-238, and Cobo, 1956, I:292 ff.), but it is worthy of note from a culture-historical standpoint that the names for biological forms are almost entirely Spanish, a situation paralleled in other areas of fishing and boating terminology. NETS By far the most popular means of taking fish on the Peruvian coast today is with some form of net. (For information on the possible predominance of line fishing in aboriginal times, see below.) Unlike Spanish fishermen, Peruvians do not seem to use a single general term to refer to all nets (Spanish, arte); the closest approach to such a term is la red, but it re- fers primarily to varieties of gill nets. The following discussion employs the most widely used terms for each type of net; these, like other fishing terms pre- sented here, are usually given in Spanish to avoid inaccuracies of translation and to preserve regional differences when these are stated. The commonest net type today is the red de cortina (gill net) reported as red derecha by Fiedler,1943:51 and Coker, 1910:345, and sometimes referred to in modern sources as red agallera). There is no good evidence for the presence of the red in aboriginal times; all evidence, including terminological features, points to its introduction in postconquest times. In typical Spanish fashion, varieties of the red are often referred to by the name of the animal they are de- signed to catch, for example, bonitera, sardinera, pejerreyera, cojinovera, tortuguera. The mesh size of each of these net types is different, :langing from about one-half inch for the pejerreyera to 231 inches for the tortuguera. (Mesh sizes are often specified by dedos [fingers], that is, the number of fingers that can be fitted parallel in a stretched mesh [see also Fiedler, 1943:51; Schweigger, 1943:257].) Since net panels are often of a standard size by number of in- cluded meshes (e.g., 50 x 100 mesh), the panels of these different nets may differ in gross size as well. Additionally, nets may contain different numbers of panels. Standardization of net types and sizes is prob- ably greater now than formerly, since many fishermen, particularly in the larger settlements and those con- centrating on fishing for the commercial market, buy their nets from factories in Callao, either directly or through an intermediary. Fishermen in smaller settle- ments still make their own gill nets, claiming that the knots are tighter in homemade nets, but they obtain the line (pita), corks (corchos), and lead weights (plomos) from commercial sources. Only heavier lines, such as those used for net edges (trallas), are some- times made by local persons. All fishermen do their own repairing, using the double-pointed needle (aguja) and mesh measure (mallero, medida), as they would in making their own nets. The aguja is usually pur- chased, but the mallero may be homemade. In making or repairing nets, fishermen usually hold the net with the left hand, the aguja with the right, and keep the net taut with the toes of one foot (see also Gillin, 1947:33). Homemade redes are not all constructed in the same way, but a fairly common type was observed in detail in Laguna Grande and will be described here. (fig. 1). The panels (tallos) of the net are 100 x 50 mesh (mallas) and are laced together at their common edges with a line (perfil) to make the whole net, which, in the example illustrated here, was 10 tallos long and two tallos high, or 100 x 1,000 mallas. The panels are attached to an upper and lower rope of half-inch diameter called trallas (cf. Gillin, 1947:33, tayas). That at the top is called the tralla de corcho (cork line) and that at the bottom the tralla de plomo (sinker, or lead line). Each side of the net is bordered by a line called the tralla de alto. Often the four trallas are composed of a single rope which encircles the net, but the sections of the rope are named as indicated. The malla (meaning, in this case, the netted fabric itself) is attached to the trallas in the following fashion: A light line (heavier than the pita but lighter than the tralla), called el encale, is attached to the trallas in a looping fashion with a clove hitch (ballestrinque) or a variant of a clove hitch in which the two round turns are crossed (ballestrinque doble, amarre de encale), and the encale sags slightly between the knots which fasten it to the tralla. The space between the amarres de encale is called encala, but varies according to the tralla to which the encale is attached. On the trallas de corcho and de plomo the distance is equivalent to that between two and one-half knots of stretched malla and is called dos y media; in fastening the encale to the tralla, fishermen stretch the malla, closing the mesh, and mark off two and one-half closed meshes to place the amarres de encale. On the trallas de alto, the amarres de encale are placed every three closed meshes. The malla is then laced to the encalles with another line (perfil) which runs once through each separate malla and alternately two and three times through each encale. Corchos are attached to the tralla de corcho at the rate of eight per tallo, each being three encalas distant from the next, not counting the encala in which it is located. Plomos are crimped to the tralla de plomo seven encalas distant from one another, again not counting the encala in which they are placed A gourd float, usually called boya [ 214 1 HAMMEL AND HAASE: PERUVIAN FISHING COMMUNITIES encalza II I corAo trazza de / corc7O tito Fig. 1. Red de cortina. (alts., mate, por6n), is attached to the tralla de cor- cho at each end of the net to mark its extremities (Gillin, 1947:33, reports chuno). If the net is to be used near the surface (flotante, de sobre agua), a large stone (cal6n) is attached at each extremity of the tralla de plomo; if it is to be sunken (de fondo), a cal6n is attached also under each tallo of the net. Calones and boyas are usually attached to the trallas by whipping a loop or tying an overhead knot in the bight of the trallas at the corners of the net; these loops are called orejas (ears), and the cal6n or boya is attached to the oreja by another line. As noted, nets at the same or at other coastal points may differ in detail. For example, in the Sechura area the trallas are called orillas, and no perfil is used to lace them to the malla, the encale passing alternately through one and two meshes of the net. Further, there are no trallas de alto, but the last cord of the malla at the ends of the net is doubled to give it extra strength. Five encalas .3re used between corchos, and other details also vary. (Some apparent terminological differences between these data and those of the Moche-Huanchaco area have been noted above; for further details see Gillin, 1947.) One further variant of the red de cortina was ob- served at Puerto Pizarro-a large, usually single-panel net, made of heavy line. This type is called la rel (from la red) and is not a true gill net but a barrier net which is suspended from shoreline poles across tidal inlets or small streams at the flood so that the fish will be trapped against it at the ebb and can be speared or taken from a canoe with a dip net. The kind of coast necessary for the use of la rel is sel- dom found outside the drowned shoreline area near the gulf of Guayaquil. The same fishing technique, and occasionally the 'term, rel, are found at points to the north on the Ecuadorean coast (C. Edwards, personal communication). In this, as in other aspects of culture, Puerto Pizarro shows itself to be closer to the Ecua- dorean than to the main Peruvian area. Interestingly, Fiedler (1943:153) does not report la rel from Puerto Pizarro, asserting that only atarrayas (throw nets) were used; la rel may thus be a recent adoption. Another net type based on the red de cortina is the trammel (trasmallo). The Mediterranean prototype and reported Peruvian examples are made of three parallel net panels (Foster, 1960:80; Schweigger, 1943:258; Coker, 1910:345, using an alternate term, red de tres pa?nos). This circumstance leads Foster (loc. cit.) to suggest de alto pda Red de Cortina i-.--- a ltou , - 215 A&rL ANTHROPOLOGICAL RECORDS an etymology of trasmallo < tres malla (three nets); an alternate etymology, in view of the way the net functions (see below), is trasmallo < tras malla (through the net), with tras < Lat. trans. The tras- mallos described to the investigators on this survey had only two parallel panels, one taut and of large mesh, the other looser and of finer weave. The net was placed so that the fine-meshed panel faced the direction from which the fish were expected. As they swam into the net, they forced the fine panel through the coarse one and were entangled (embolsado) in the sacks so formed. Edwards, however, saw a three- panel trasmallo on the coast in 1958 (personal com- munication); this, the Iberian, and the previously re- ported Peruvian types have the advantage over the two-panel net of being two-directional. The trasmallo is reported by Coker (1910:345) as being of European introduction and of restricted distribution. Fiedler (1943:51) similarly notes it as a recent European introduction, but reports it as common. This survey indicated that the trasmallo was currently of fairly wide distribution, but nevertheless relatively rare in the sense that few examples exist in any one place and that they are not commonly used. Other than the gill net, the only common net type is a genus of haul nets referred to by the term chin- chorro (chinchorro de la playa, Schweigger, 1943:258). (None of the other terms used in Spain for haul nets were encountered on this survey.) Chinchorros are very much limited in their usefulness by surf and shore conditions, that is, they must be shot in fairly calm water. Since shoreline without heavy ground swell or breakers is rare in Peru, these nets are less common than the red de cortina. This situation is particularly evident on the exposed southern coast; for example, fishermen from the large community of San Andres can use chinchorros only at a single beach, Mendieta. Generally speaking, the chinchorro is not a commercial net but is used most heavily by subsis- tence fishermen or occasionally by small commercial operators fishing for the fresh or dried fish market. As the intensity of commercial exploitation increases, the red de cortina becomes more common and is it- self eventually replaced by other kinds of nets for very large-scale operations (e.g., purse seines, haul seines, tuna traps). Basically, the chinchorro consists of a net sack bordered by two long wings. The net is shot offshore from some kind of craft or walked out in shallow waters, the wings are spread, and the whole apparatus is drawn to shore by ropes, the gradual closure of the wings and passage of the net through the water trapping the fish in the sack. Often one end of the net is left on shore (dejar la punta), and the other is carried out and eventually returned. Chinchorros are usually hauled by gangs of men and boys, but donkeys are sometimes used in addition. Small chinchorros can be handled by two merl. The process of hauling is apparently called calar a tierra (not halar [jalar]) or la cala. If boats are used, one usually follows the sack to shore, guiding the haulers by indicating the position of any school of fish and eventually frighten- ing off the sea birds when the sack reaches shallow water. A typical chinchorro observed at Constante (fig. 2) was constructed as follows: The wings (alares) were made of two longitudinal panels (pa-nos, cf. tallo on the red de cortina), each 33 mallas high and 35 arm- lengths (brazadas) long (brazada here was defined as a half-fathom; it can also mean a full-fathom). The panels were lashed together along their common edge by a light line (cosedura; the term perfil was not used). The outer ends of the wings were attached to vertical sticks called calones (cf. cal6n, rock weight on the red de cortina); these serve to keep the edges of the alares taut when a strain is taken on the haul- ing ropes (alts., vetas, caloneras, cabos) which are attached to each calon by a rope sling. The alares in the Constante net were separated from the sack by an extra piece called a cuchilla (cf. Foster, 1960:85, cu- chillo), a leaf-shaped piece of netting rnade by re- ducing the number of mesh in successive rows away from the center of the piece. At the upper edge of each alar, where the alar joins the sack, the cuchilla was two to three meshes wide; at the lower edge of each alar, that is, near its own center, it was 70 meshes wide. The function of the cuchilla is to tip the sack up when a horizontal strain is taken on the alares, so that the sack will not drag excessively on the bottom. Both sack and alares were attached (to opposite sides) of the cuchilla with a cosedura. The sack itself (copo or copa) was approximately two meters high (i.e., of the same diameter as the alares were high) and 15 arm-lengths long, and was formed of six longitudinal panels of netting, three above and three below, sewn together with coseduras and closed at the rear by another cosedura which was pulled out to release the fish when the net reached shore. The first 70 malla of the bottom three panels were made of heavier line than the rest of the net, since that portion of the copa tends to wear somewhat more be- cause of being hauled over the bottom, despite the action of the cuchilla. (Interestingly, the cuchilla was not made of heavier cord, although it rubs over the bottom more than any other part of the net.) The up- per rope to which the net was attached (orilla de ar- riba; cf. the use of orilla as an alternate to tralla on the red de cortina in this area) ran from one cal6n along the top of one alar, across the top of the front of the copa, and down the other alar to the other calon. The orilla de abajo (bottom rope) was simi- larly placed on the lower edge of the alar, passing along the front of the cuchilla. Corchos were attached to the orilla de arriba and plomos to the orilla de abajo. A gourd float (punta) was attached by a light line to the rear of the copa to mark its position in the water. In laying the net with one end fixed to shore or in a boat, and allowing the free end to float or to be swum to shore, the free end is marked with another gourd (chuna; cf. Gillin, 1947:29, chuno). A somewhat different type of chinchorro was ob- served at Callao. This one, although similar in over- all form and method of use, was made of vertical panels, both in the alares and the sack (here called saco). The alares, each 35 arm-lengths long, were made of three panels with differing mesh sizes, the mesh of the outermost panel being large (malla clara), that of the middle panel intermediate, and that of the panel next to the saco most closely woven. (Schweigger, 1943:258-259, reports a similar differentiation of wing panels, with bandas of open and espesos of closer mesh.) There was no cuchilla, and the alares were sewn directly to the saco of four vertical panels by a cosedura. The four panels of the saco were joined at the bottom of the net, as well as at their common edges, by coseduras, and closed by another cosedura at the rear. The saco was six arm-lengths long and four wide when flattened. In its arrangement of panels, 216 HAMMEL AND HAASE: PERUVIAN FISHING COMMUNITIES I4 C. 2 -0 IN-] azaca? copa orilia &e / arr Conl9tan-te Catcao C7iznchorros Fig. 2. Chinchorros differing mesh sizes in the alares, and lack of the cuchilla, the Callao net is closest to the Spanish forms, for example, the jabega from Conil de la Frontera illus- trated by Foster (1960: fig. 2). Similar in form to the chinchorro but different in usage is the arrastra or chinchorro de arrastre (called chinchorro by Schweigger, 1943:258, distinguish- ing it from the chinchorro de la playa); this is a drag net usually hauled from a sailing vessel. The example seen had alares 20 feet long, a symmetrical inter- mediate section of malla clara seven feet long, and a saco 12 feet long. The arrastra was encountered on this survey only in the Supe-Chiclayo zone, and then rarely. Schweigger (1943:258), however, reports a large form which was probably similar to it (lam- paro), and Fiedler (1943:53) and Coker (1910:342, 346) describe a modified chinchorro with a funnellike mouth, hauled by two vessels (anchovetera, the term still em- ployed at Puerto Chico). Cobo (1956, II:269) reports the use of a haul seine between two vessels in the colonial period. Although Cobo's evidence indicates the early presence of the type, it seems to be em- ployed now largely in major commercial enterprises, as are the boliche (purse seine) and trampa (trap, analogous to the Spanish almadraba). Some of these large nets, particularly the tuna traps, seem to be recent introductions from North America, sometimes via Japan (see Ancieta C., 1952:9-12; Schweigger, 1943:268-269). A similar term, arrastre, is applied on the southern coast to a small net made of chain link fencing, wire, and rope, which is used in con- junction with a drag rake, winch, and power launch in commercial mussel fishing. The throw or cast net (atarraya, alt., tarrayo) is relatively rare except for subsistence fishing. This is a circular net, woven with a regular reduction technique to form a loose disc of netting. The speci- mens observed were about five feet in diameter, with lead weights along the circumference and a single line from the center of the net which is held by the fishermen. The net is cast in shallow, calm water by a wading man, allowed to settle to the bottom, and then slowly drawn in. As the center of the net lifts from the bottom, the lead weights draw together, trapping the fish in the folds of the net. (See also Stevenson, 1829, II:19-20; Fiedler, 1943:56-57, and Coker, 1910: Pl. 13, fig. 4 for an illustration). The form reported by Foster for Spain (1960:81), with lines attached to the circumference and passing through an iron ring at the center, that reported by Schweigger (1943: 256), with a drawstring, and that by Gillin (1947: 29), with a slit and two ropes, were not observed. It is likely that atarrayas, which are probably all homemade, vary widely in details of cato6r, 217 ANTHROPOLOGICAL RECORDS construction. Schweigger (1943:258) suggests that the atarraya may have been used aboriginally. The term, of course, is of Spanish origin. There are no archae- ological specimens of the net type, and although it is widely used by primitive peoples in one form or an- other, it is quite common in Iberia as well (see Rod- riguez Santamaria, 1927:436 ff., figs. 367, 514 for de- scriptions of the tarrayo and esparavel). The only other net type encountered was the handled dip net (alts., carcal carcalillo, chipo, yuco). The net is roughly circular, made with a reduction technique like the atarraya, and is crudely lashed to an arc of willow closed by a piece of rope or wire; the willow arc is mounted on a long wooden handle. The dip net is used for taking trapped fish, crustaceans (see also Ruschenberger, 1834:360, commenting on Huarmey), or small fish which have been stunned by dynamite in a common bait-fishing technique. The two-handled dip net (cahuan) reported by Gillin (1947:28) was not ob- served. (See Rodriguez Santamaria, 1927:204 ff., figs. 214, 308, and pp. 703 ff. for discussion and illustration of Spanish types, e.g., the camaronera for taking shrimp, cuchara, salabre, and others.) TRAPS The fresh-water shrimp (camar6n del rio) traps (nasas) reported by Gillin (1947:29) were not observed directly on this survey in the Ica-Pizarro zone. In- formants were generally familiar with the idea of such traps but said that they were rarely used, since camaron fishing had declined markedly in recent years. The same trap was reported to be still in use on the Moche and Majes rivers and was seen in use just up- stream from the mouth of the Oconia River in 1958, and in the Rimac and Ambar (Supe) rivers in 1953. (See Hartman, 1958, for some illustrations of Peru- vian types and Rodriguez Santamaria, 1927:546 ff. for Spanish examples close to the Peruvian ones.) Crab traps (cangrejeros) similar to that reported by Gillin (saca, 1947:35-36) were reported at scattered points along the coast; these are simple net baskets, baited and lowered to the bottom. HOOK-AND- LINE FISHING Several methods of hook-and-line fishing are em- ployed along the coast, particularly in more conserva- tive settlements. Both archaeological and colonial documentary evidence attest the use of hook and line in aboriginal times (Means, 1942:figs. 2, 3; Garcilaso, 1945:166; Cobo, 1956, I:305, II:269) and evidence for their continued use is given in later documents as well (e.g., Hutchinson, 1873: 218). Schweigger (1943: 255) suggests that no other means of taking fish was employed in the Sechura zone, an area in which nets are now used in addition to hook and line but where hook-and-line fishing may still be the most popular technique (e.g., at Matacaballo). We are suspicious of the accuracy of Schweigger's observation in the abso- lute form given, but at least it points up the greater use of gill nets for modern commercial fishing and of hook and line, chinchorros, and atarrayas for con- servative commercial or subsistence fishing. The commonest hook-and-line method employs the cordel (line), which consists of a simple length of fishing twine, usually wound on a short stick or board, one or more commercial hooks (anzuelos) attached by a line or wire leader at one end, and a lead sinker above the hook(s). The hooks are baited with part of an anchovy or other small fish or with muymuy, soft- shelled crab, or other small crustacean, and are sus- pended from boats or pier sides. (Cobo, 1956, I: 305, reports the use of caballa [mackerel] for bait in co- lonial times.) More rarely, cordeles are used from the beach. The use of fishing poles is restricted to sport fishermen. Although the cordel seems inefficient for even light commercial fishing, experience on the survey demonstrates that three men with two cordeles each can literally fill a twenty two-foot open boat with mackerel in the course of a night's fishing. Fish so caught are usually killed by clubbing (Coker, 1910:342) or by pressing the thumbnail into the head; fish caught in nets are usually left to suffocate. The espinel is a trawl line of varying length. If one end is attached to shore, the other is cast out to sea from the beach or carried out in a small craft. Alternatively, one end may be attached to a boat, the other dropped, and the line extended by rowing away. Espineles are sometimes tended (as in the latter ex- ample) and sometimes left overnight (as when they are cast out from shore). Espineles are somewhat less common than cordeles, perhaps because of the problem of acquiring bait for so many hooks, as many as 1,500 of which may be attached to the master line. Espineles are most commonly employed in the taking of bottom-feeding fish s, particularly congrio (cusk eel). The trampilla (alt., robadera) is not a trap as its name might suggest, but a snag line. Made somewhat like a cordel, but with multiple hooks which may be gang hooks, it is cast into a school of fish and jerked back sharply in the hope of snagging some of the fish. (See also Murphy, 1925: 219-220.) Trampillas are rather rare. Lures, generally known as muestras (southern alt., chispa), are used occasionally from boats in still- fishing for schooling fish and sometimes in trolling (a carrera). rhey are usually purchased in Callao and consist of a barbless hook with a bundle of feathers attached. Cobo (1956, I:305) noted the use of a lure consisting of white cloth attached to a hook in mack- erel and bonito fishing in the early colonial period. Spinners (properly called chispas) are also employed in trolling. SPEARS, GAFFS, AND MISCELLANEOUS ARTIFACTS The commonest implement in this residual category is the gancho, a handled gaff of general coastal distri- bution, about two feet long, which is used by men for taking octopus (pulpo). (Women usually take pulpo by hand and kill the animals by biting them in the head.) Harpoons and two-pronged fish spears are also of wide distribution but relatively little used except in subsis- tence fishing; a similar situation seems to be charac- teristic of the colonial period (Gutierrez de Santa Clara, 1905:528, 530, in night fishing with torches; Cobo, 1956, I: 292, 305; Garcilaso, 1945: 166, describing fish- gigs, or fisgas) and later (Tschudi, 1847:39; Uhle, 1906: 3-4). Along most of the coast today the spears are used for taking flatfish, turtles, and rays; at Puerto Pizarro (and at Ma6ncora on an intensive commercial basis) harpoons are used in taking shark. (Fiedler, 1943:153, does not report this practice; thus, it may 218 HAMMEL AND HAASE: PERUVIAN FISHING COMMUNITIES be a recent development.) Both the spear and the har- poon have metal points and are referred to as harpon. Fire-hardened spears were apparently also used in the sixteenth century (Gutierrez de Santa Clara, 1905: 528). Another common article is the volador, a wooden plunger which is driven vertically into the water to frighten fish into nets (see also Fiedler, 1943:52). Large gourds are used, particularly by more conserva- tive fishermen, to hold their gear and food; espineles, for example, are carefully coiled in large gourds with the hooks set into the edge to avoid tangling. WATER CRAFT4 It is in vessel types and their management that one finds the clearest evidence of aboriginal techniques and implements. Three types of ancient craft are still fair- ly numerous on the coast, although some are of re- stricted distribution: several subtypes of dugout canoe (canoa), of the balsawood raft (balsa), and of the reed float (caballito del mar). (The term, balsa, in its gen- eral sense of any raft, was also applied to reed floats on the coast in colonial times.) No trace was found of the inflated skin floats which may have been used in the Nasca culture (L. Dawson, personal communication) and which were reported by Europeans on the southern coast in colonial and later times (Acosta, 1894, I:236, commenting on Ica ca. 1590; Porter, 1822, I:97; Cobo, 1956, II: 266, commenting on Arica; Hall, 1824, I:203, commenting on Mollendo; Ruschenberger, 1834:153-154, 165-166, 339, commenting on Coquimbo, Cobija, and Arica; Shelvocke, 1726:169, 273, commenting on Arica and Pisagua; Coker, 1910:343, commenting on Mol- lendo). Fiedler (1943:38) saw none of these, but they were noted on the Chilean coast as late as the 1940's by F. Cornely (personal communication to C. Edwards). (See also Means, 1942; Lothrop, 1932.) Canoes were formerly found as far south as Pucu- sana (south of Lima), although their southern occur- rences were rare and discontinuous, but they are now restricted to the Puerto Pizarro area. There they are of at least two types, a smaller one about 20 feet long and 12 or 2 feet from bottom to gunwale, hollowed out of a single tree trunk, and a large one, somewhat longer but differing principally in the greater free- board created by adding a long plank (washboard) at the gunwale on each side (see also Murphy, 1925-216; Tschudi, 1847:147; Lothrop, 1932:229 ff.). Balance logs were not observed (see Lothrop, 1932:230-231, P1. XVa). Both types of canoe are imported from Ecuador, the smaller costing about 1,000 soles and the larger about 1,500 soles ($1.00 U. S. = c. 20 soles at the time of the survey). Both types of canoe are used in harpooning sharks. There is a platformlike extension at the prow or at the prow and stern of the canoe; at least that at the prow is pierced by a small hole, ap- parently for the attachment of a painter (Lothrop, 1932:230) or of a harpoon line (see below). The har- pooner stands on the platform to throw his weapon, the head of which is attached by a long line tied through the hole. The harpooned shark, sometimes reaching 30 feet in length, pulls the canoe through the 4We are particularly indebted to Clinton R. Edwards, not only for his comments on drafts of this paper, but also for allowing us the use of materials independently gathered by him in 1958; readers interested in details of boat types and navigation are re- ferred to Edwards, 1960, and his manuscript in preparation. water until exhausted, and is then dispatched. Some- times the harpoon line is attached to a barrel or steel drum in addition to the boat or to the drum alone. In either case, the float tends to tire the shark and later serves as a marker, even if fish and tackle have been cast adrift. (The prow and stern platforms on the canoes have other functional as well as distributional implications in Ecuador-C. Edwards, MS, personal communication.) The harpooning of fish and turtles is also known from the colonial period and is probably an aboriginal trait (Garcilaso, 1945: 166; Cobo, 1956, I: 292). Canoes are propelled by a paddle or sail, as they evidently were in aboriginal times (Cobo, 1956, II:265). Paddlers usually sit in the stern if alone; if there are two, one is at either end of the vessel. A mast step is often found in the bottom of the canoe, about at its center point. The mast is a simple pole, supported by mast partners and guyed by stays running fore and aft; it bears a simple triangular sail, without gaff. (See Edwards, 1960:385-386; no composite masts were observed.) The sail is similar to that described by Edwards for Manabi, although lacking gaff and boom, and is thus similar to that pictured by Spilbergen (Edwards, 1960: fig. 4). Fiedler (1943: 39) reports what may be a lugsail on canoes, although it seems an extra- ordinarily clumsy rig for that hull. Balsas are of several types. Some are crude affairs of a few logs lashed together and often serve as life rafts on sailing boats or for the laying of haul or gill nets a short distance offshore. Others are somewhat more finely shaped, with some taper at the prow. Such rafts are propelled by paddling, either with the hands or with a simple paddle made of wood or of a split piece of Guayaquil cane (see also Garcilaso, 1945:165- 166). One paddle noted at Huanchaquito was double- ended, with a cane loom and boxwood blades; for evi- dence bearing on the aboriginal use of the double pad- dle and its continuance in later times, see Cobo, 1956, II: 266; Hall, 1824, I: 203; Frezier's drawing in Lothrop, 1932: Pl. XXa; Raimondi, 1942, I: 187; Shelvocke, 1726: 273; Ruschenberger, 1834:153-154. The more elaborate balsas are propelled by a lugsail (vela latina) and steered by centerboards. The construction and operation of sailing balsas, as well as their probable history, have been adequately treated by Edwards (1960), and no further details will be given here. All the balsawood employed in the construction of these rafts comes from Ecuador, usually commercially, although some is picked up as driftwood along the coast where it is deposited by occasional anomalous currents countering the Humboldt. The source of the wood may be the principal factor in the restricted northern dis- tribution of balsas, which were never found south of Anc6n in the recent past and are now found in their more elaborate form only from Sechura north. (They were, however, observed in Callao in the seventeenth century; see Edwards, 1960:374.) Recent severe re- strictions on commercial shipments between Peru and Ecuador may also be a factor in the restricted distribution of balsas and perhaps in the disappearance of the larger varieties which are known to have been in use at least into the first quarter of this century (Murphy, 1925: 39, 216; Coker, 1910: 343). The caballitos (alt., potrillos, in Stevenson, 1829, II: 19) may well be the most ancient general form of water craft still extant in Peru; they are illustrated on ancient pottery of the Early Intermediate Period (ca. A.D. 150-800; see Lothrop, 1932:Pl.XVIII), were 219 ANTHROPOLOGICAL RECORDS Cabottitos del Afar Asi a sse X |g=AD~~~~-- /Iuanchcco %San A* c.15%"1 I Fig. 3. iaballitos del mar. reported by early travelers (Acosta, 1894, I: 235-236, speaking of Callao ca. 1590; Cobo, 1956, II: 265), and have a wide modern distribution. Parallel forms (called balsas) occur on Lake Titicaca. Generally speaking, there are three varieties of caballito (see fig. 3)-a northern, pointed one made of two bundles of reed with a cockpit (caja) at the after end (see also Raimondi, 1942, I: 186; Ruschenberger, 1834:379-380), a southern, square-ended one of three bundles without a cockpit, and a rare intermediate form of three bundles, tapered, but without a cockpit. The two-bundle northern variety was found in this survey from the Chiclayo to the Virui area, the southern from Chimbote to Caballos (near Nasca), and the intermediate form at San Jose, on the boundary between the other two areas. Caballitos were not found in the primary area of balsas (Sechura and north), but their ranges overlap between Virui and Huan- chaco. At Asia, on the south-central coast, two subtypes of the southern caballito are distinguished-a larger, called balsa, for carrying the chinchorro, and a smaller, called patache, for carrying the hauling ropes. There are several types of plank craft found along the coast, all made by professional shipwrights and clearly of European derivation. In general, the boats of the Ica-Pisco region (chalanas, embarcaciones) are open, with a transom of wineglass section, and about 22 feet long, powered by a 12 H.P. Swedish outboard engine and a sail for emergencies (by government regulation). Sails were formerly used as the prime means of power. The boats now cost about 4,500 soles for the hull and 12,000 for the engine. Outboards dis- appear and the frequency of inboard motors and decked hulls increases as one moves northward along the coast and commercial fishing grows in intensity; such vessels (lanchas) become common at Pucusana. They have a hull costing about 25,000 soles and a 25 H. P. engine costing 50,000 soles. The incidence of inboard-powered vessels begins to decrease sharply in the Chiclayo region, where lugsails (velas latinas) are used in addi- tion to motors on a sailboat hull (decked, as is the lancha hull, but with a more bluff counter, or double- ended, like a felucca hull). North of Chiclayo, except for factory ships and large-scale shark hunters, motors are not found, having been replaced by lugsails on the sailboat hulls (bote de vela). Felucca hulls, once quite popular in Peru and still found in large numbers in 1I I rp I _ I Ia i , a x I i4 220 I I. I I . I I' li I i II, . . . II If I di'lil .11 : I 11I II ll? HAMMEL AND HAASE: PERUVIAN FISHING COMMUNITIES Chile (Edwards, personal communication), are rela- tively rare. The standard bluff-countered sailboat hull may be derived from the balandra or balandrita (sloop) which was common on the Peruvian coast in the early 1900's (Fiedler, 1943:43). Only one other type of large vessel was reported by informants-a two-masted ves- sel with three sails (bergantin) used around Pisco be- fore 1950 (fig. 4). (For details of hull and sail types in earlier years of this century, see Coker, 1910 and Fiedler, 1943; C. Edwards is preparing an independent analysis of these materials from data gathered by him in 1958 [Edwards, MS].) Ao&e de Veta Pisco .3 0'0 f- :1 Fig. 4. Bote de vela (Pisco). Small vessels of plank construction, used princi- pally for harbor work, inshore fishing, and minor lightering are common along the coast. These are usually referred to as zapato, zapato chalana, chalana, or zapato chino; there is, unfortunately, no apparent consistency between the terms and types of construc- tion over the coast as a whole. The zapato chalana at Cerro Azul and a few other nearby points is a relatively rare, square-ended dory, prized for its ability to negotiate heavy surf (fig. 5). KNOTS AND SPLICES The relatively small technical inventory of the con- servative Peruvian fisherman is well illustrated in the area of knots and splices, and is probably in part a Zapac:o Chalana Cerro Azut 1.4 C. 12'I0- O1 Fig. 5. Zapato chalana (Cerro Azul). function of the present lack of emphasis on complicated rigging and sailing equipment. Subsistence fishermen are usually familiar only with the netting knots, the square knot, and perhaps two half-hitches. The men in the Sechura area, who are accomplished sailors (reported to round the Galapagos and the Lobos de Afuera by dead reckoning; see also Schweigger, 1943: 254, and Coker, 1910: 343), and who often serve in the Peruvian Navy, furnished the most complete list of knots and tied examples: adeguia (bowline), adeguia por ceno (bowline on a bight), nudo de balsa espaniol (Spanish bowline), adegula triple (triple bow- line), cabilla (two half-hitches), nudo simple (square knot or granny), nudo de union (square knot, girth hitch, or sheet bend), nudo de malla and nudo de la red (two different netting knots), ballestrinque (clove hitch), ballestrinque doble or amarre de encale (clove hitch with the two round turns crossed). The men at Laguna Grande were familiar with all these knots when they were tied for them, but they could not re- produce them all and did not know all of them by name. In addition, they used a round turn and two- half-hitches, as well as a double or triple becket bend (the latter for tying nylon fishing lines). Standard barrel knots are used for tying leaders to hooks. Splices are rarely found; only the eye splice ap- proaches being common, and then only among com- mercial fishermen. Only former sailors know some- thing of the short splice, although most fishermen were aware that ropes could be so joined. No inform- ant had ever seen a long splice, despite the fact that lines must be rove through blocks in operating the vela latina on sailing boats and balsas. 221 ROLE DIFFERENTIATION AND ECONOMIC ARRANGEMENTS MANUFACTURE OF EQUIPMENT Some remarks on the manufacture of craft and tackle have already been made above, but these may well be amplified here. Local and personal manufacture of arti- facts is greatest in the smaller, poorer, and more con- servative villages, and the material equipment in these places is simpler. The more deeply a fisherman is in- volved in large-scale commercial fishing the less likely he is to make his own equipment. Nets, as noted above, are sometimes made locally, but the mesh line, corks, and lead weights are always purchased. (At the very conservative settlement at Puer- to Moorin, gourds were even substituted for cork floats.) The arroba (25 lbs.) of line needed for a corbinera of four-and-one-half-inch mesh costs about 500 soles, and the entire net about 900 soles, if made at home. When purchased, such a net would cost about twice as much. Factory-made nets are made in Callao and often pur- chased direct from the manufacturer; Schweigger (1943: 330) states that all nets purchased in Callao before the second World War were imported from Italy, but we have no confirmation of that report. It suggests, however, as do other data, that the influence of Italian fishing prac- tices on Peru may have been very great. Heavy lines may be twisted locally with a simple, rotating twisting paddle, but the fiber for them is always purchased. Gourd floats are home grown and made, and the tools for making and repairing nets may be homemade. Line for cordeles and similar tackle is always purchased, as are hooks and lead sinkers. Plank watercraft are never made by local fishermen but always by professional shipwrights located in the major coastal towns. Canoes ar-e imported ready-made from Ecuador, although the local fishermen at Puerto Pizarro make and emplace their own temporary masts. The wood for balsas is also imported, but the rafts are made by local fishermen. Only the totora reed for cabal- litos is an indigenous raw material, and most fisher- men using these craft make them themselves, although they usually purchase the reed. Sails, as far as could be determined, were locally sewn only at Puerto Pizarro, where they were made of flour sacks. In all other settle- ments they were of canvas and were obtained commer- cially. (Cf. Gillin, 1947: 33, and Raimondi, 1942, I: 87, who reports sailmaking out of locally available fiber in the Republican period.) MARKETING Fishermen who work principally for their own subsis- tence sometimes sell fish at a local dock or along the side of a highway, when opportunity permits. Those who fish principally for the market have some regular arrange- ment for getting the fish to their customers. in some areas, the fishermen's wives and female kin claim the catch as soon as it reaches the shore, or take it on con- signment, then transport it by foot, burro, or vehicle to a local market place. The role of women in commercial operations may be more intense on the southern than on the northern coast (C. Edwards, personal communication). Fish buyers sometimes come to the docks or beaches and purchase the fish from the fishermen, transporting the cargo to distant markets by truck. It is said that the Chi- nese of the coast are particularly active as fish buyers. Some fishermen have their own trucks and transport their catch to market, where their wives and other female rela- tives sell it, either to local vendors, over a counter at the market, or from the parked truck. In Laguna Grande, the fishermen are often linked by friendship, kinship, or compadrazgo to several wealthy men of Comatrana who own trucks, handle all commercial arrangements, and sometimes advance money for capital improvement. PROFIT SHARING Methods of allocating the profits from the catch or the catch itself vary widely in detail but are similar in the general practice of division by shares. In simpler meth- ods of fishing, as when two men related by kinship use only a chinchorro, walking into the surf, and when the catch is consumed jointly by their dependents, no formal system of division prevails. If one man has clear title to the net, the catch may be divided one-third for the net and one-third for each man; thus, the owner of the net receives two-thirds of the catch. If a plank boat is used, one part of the catch is reserved for it; a share is only rarely reserved for a balsa, never for a caballito. A share may also be reserved for the motor. Since fisher- men cooperating in joint expeditions often bring their own nets (or at least the panels to be joined together) shares need not always be reserved for the nets. Sometimes the shares due the boat and/or motor are deducted separate- ly from the catch in each net, which is kept separate or marked for the owner of the particular net (or panel). Costs of operation (e.g., for gasoline) are usually de- ducted before shares are calculated, and the shares may vary in size at different points on the coast. Generally, the share for boat and motor combined comes to between 30 and 50 per cent of the total catch. SEXUAL DIVISION OF LABOR As implied above, the sale of fish is the exclusive province of women, except in commercial operations of great volume and complexity. Women do not parti- cipate in the fishing itself, except to gather some shellfish, octopus, and seaweed from the rocks, usu- ally without tools. On rare occasions women and chil- dren help with the mending of nets and may also manufacture ropes. The cleaning, drying, and occa- sional salting of fish is attended to by both men and women. All the household chores except those involv- ing heavy labor, as in house construction, are handled by the women. Although the men's predominance in gainful activity gives them some authority over the women, that authority is far from absolute. Women were observed, in general, to have a strong, and fre- quently exercised, veto power over their husbands' intended actions and sometimes to initiate action themselves. [ 222 1 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The data surveyed in this report suggest that the processes of technological and social change in coastal Peruvian fishing over several centuries are obscure because of the relative lack of accurately dated and detailed information and that their analysis would be complex even if the requisite information were avail- able. Some relatively simple explanations can be of- fered, but we must not be misled by the paucity of the data into thinking that such explanations are total ones; rather, they should be regarded as possible com- ponents of an intricate historical pattern. In the para- graphs to follow we will consider problems of persis- tence and selective borrowing, taking note of the pos- sible role of technological and economic efficiency, the functional interrelationship of different economic com- plexes, role and prestige relationships, and the con- cept of culture crystallization-that is, of an initial stabilization of an acculturative situation which inhibits further change (Foster, 1960: 227-234). Although fishing has a respectable antiquity in Peru and although the old pattern of farmer-fisher relation- ships and of some isolated subsistence fishermen per- sists in places, increasing commercialization and Euro- pean influences have markedly changed the total char- acter of Peruvian fishing and navigational techniques. Little of the specific aboriginal technical inventory seems to have survived. Although some nets seem to have been used by the native inhabitants, all those used today have clear Spanish prototypes and names. The chinchorro, perhaps without a sack, may have been employed aboriginally (see Gillin, 1947: 29; Fied- ler, 1943: 38; Edwards, 1960:fig.4, and particularly Guti6rrez de Santa Clara, 1905: 528-530, noting "redes largas" and "mantas grandes," used sometimes at sea and sometimes in "fish drives" at the shore), as the throw net may have been, but we have no evidence for the latter other than Schweigger's assertion (1943: 257). Acosta may be referring to gill nets in his am- biguous comments at the close of the sixteenth century (1894, I: 235); see also Fiedler, 1943: 38. The shrimp trap may also be an aboriginal form, although, as noted, clear Spanish prototypes for these artifacts exist as well. (One cannot, of course, ignore the pos- sibility that diffusion occurred in the other direction, but it seems less likely.) Knots and splices, as well as spears and gaffs also have clear European proto- types, although some kind of fish spear was used aboriginally (Bird, 1946, on northern Chile; Garcilaso, 1945: 166; Cobo, 1956, I: 292, 305) and knots certainly were. One aboriginal netting knot is the same as that used on modern homemade nets (Kostritsky, 1955: figs. 8, 9). The sociology of Peruvian fishing is clearly of Iberian derivation; division by shares and the predom- inance of women in economic transactions are as marked in Spain as in Peru, and there is no evidence for the presence of similar patterns in aboriginal times. The retarded replacement of aboriginal watercraft, however, deserves further consideration; the hulls of some aboriginal watercraft, the system of centerboard navigation, and the split cane and double paddles have all persisted. The simplest explanation of this partial retention seems to lie in considerations of available capital and expenditure of labor, as well as in the functions of various vessel types. The large craft used for coastal transport in late aboriginal times were built, operated, and supported by a complex socio-economic structure. While that structure was largely destroyed by the Spanish conquest, it was replaced by another, not dissimilar in some respects, and some Spanish coastal commerce seems to have been carried by large balsas in the colonial period (Dampier, 1927: 102; Porter, 1822, I: 123). Indeed, there is evidence of the occasional use of large balsas until the first quarter of this cen- tury (Murphy, 1925: 39, 216; Coker, 1910: 343; Ruschen- berger, 1834: 413; Stevenson, 1829, II: 223-225; Edwards, personal communication). Their eventual disappearance, in our view, is attributable not only to their replace- ment by more modern boat types of greater efficiency and prestige but also to the marked decline in local coastal commerce which has occurred all along the Peruvian coast. Balsas were useful and efficient craft in coasting operations, but now that most Peruvian commercial shipping is oriented toward foreign ports, with its internal commerce proceeding by land, the large balsas have lost much of their usefulness and commercial support and have been abandoned. In short, their decline may be due not only to competition with other vessel types but also to competition with the railroads and the trucking industry. The date of disappearance of the large balsas and that of marked increase in mechanized land transportation are in accord with this interpretation. The disap- pearance of sealskin and balsawood rafts as lighters may also be due, in part, to the concentration of sea-going commerce at a few ports with advanced docking facilities, for example, Callao (see Hammel, 1962: 45). The persistence of smaller craft can also be ex- plained, up to a point, on economic grounds. The simpler craft, which could be made at no great ex- pense and with family labor, were perfectly adequate for subsistence and have persisted in use by subsis- tence fishermen. They were not adequate for commer- cial fishing, and it is precisely where fishing has be- come commercialized that one sees their decline. The degree of commercialization of fishing is usually re- flected in the nirodernity of the fishermen's equipment; both these factors correlate, to some degree, with geographical position. The greatest degree of com- mercialization and modernization is found on the cen- tral coast, around Lima, which has long been the coastal point most heavily affected by outside influ- ences. The south coast (San Andres, Laguna Grande) follows, with the Chiclayo area third, the Sechura area fourth, and finally the scattered settlements of purely subsistence fishermen. It is worthy of note that this distribution of modern elements and commercialization in fishing is in accord with the generally greater cul- tural conservatism of northern coastal Peru. The problem of restricted adoption from the variety of fishing techniques found in Iberia poses still another problem. Why are the number of types of equipment found in Iberia apparently so reduced in the New World? (Rodriguez Santamaria, 1927: xiii, suggests that more than 500 different kinds of fishing artifacts are found in Spain.) One possible explanation immediately comes [ 223 1 ANTHROPOLOGICAL RECORDS to mind, namely that the aboriginal and Spanish fish- ing complexes did not come into full contact It is not likely that whatever Spanish fishermen came to the New World were a representative sample, and they could not have offered the Iberian fishing reper- toire, in all its diversity, for adoption by the Peru- vians (see also Foster, 1960:85). One should note, however, that the reduction in variability involved in the transference of Iberian techniques to the New World does not imply that the New World techniques are uniform (cf. Foster, 1960: 84). Even a survey such as this one indicates that there are many sub- types of gill nets, haul nets, and other artifacts, even though the number of major types may be less than in Iberia. It is not impossible that the diversity of Spanish techniques, with its long and continued region- alistic history, consists of a multiplicity of recognized artifacts with relatively less subtypical variation, while the lack of differentiation of major types (as well as the paucity of field observation) in Latin America ob- scures the internal variations that exist. Further, when commercial fishing in Latin America is taken into account, Iberian diversity no longer looms so large, even if one ignores some of the commercial apparatuses which have recently been introduced from the United States, rather than from Spain in the colo- nial period. One miight also attempt to explain the limited scope of Latin American fishing in terms of the limited selec- tion noted, together with culture crystallization. The data on fishing technology, however, are not strongly in support of such an interpretation. On the contrary, evidence in the area of vessel types indicates progres- sive adoption of European introductions from the earli- est contact to the present. A variety of hulls was in- troduced by Spanish, Italian, and North American fish- ermen during the nineteenth century-for example, the felucca, balandra, bote de vela, and the whaleboat, some of which have now been abandoned (Coker, 1910; Fiedler, 1943: 39 ff.; Edwards, personal communication). Documented successive adoptions of sail types support this same argument; square, lug, lateen, gaff, and Marconi rigs have all been reported (Gutier rez de Santa Clara, 1905: 527; Fiedler, 1943: 39 ff.; Schweigger, 1943: 254; Edwards, 1960: figs. 2, 3, pp. 375, 379). It is more difficult to comment on the processes involved in the diffusion and acceptance of net types, since our knowledge of the history of these forms, in both Iberia and Peru, is sketchy, but some changes in the inventory clearly occurred. The trammel may not have been introduced to Peru until the late nine- teenth or early twentiety century; further, the cuchilla in the chinchorro may be an Andean innovation, since it is reported from no other area (cf. Foster, 1960:85). If a chinchorro without a sack was used aboriginally, it may have persisted until about 1800 (see the draw- ing in Martinez Companon, 1936: Pl. 50). The fact that Italians were heavily involved in the commercialization of fishing in the nineteenth century also raises the possf- bility that some of the correspondences noted between Peruvian and Iberian artifacts might simple be corres- pondences between the former and implements of general northern or western Mediterranean distribution. (The fact that Spanish terms are used for artifacts does not affect the argument; many of the modern techniques of wine-making, for example, are of Italian introduction into Peru but have Spanish names in spite of their origin. Changes have certainly occurred in the technology of line-fishing, with the adoption of modern hooks, lures, and spinners, and line-fishing itself may have diminished in importance in some areas as a result of commercialization and the intensified use of gill nets. Many of these changes, however, are superficial and substitutive-European steel or iron hooks replaced shell and copper hooks of the aboriginal period, pur- chased twine replaced the hand-spun cotton line of earlier times, and so on. The same situation is true with respect to fish spears, which, together with line- fishing, seem to represent the most conservative ele- ment in the modern Peruvian fishing repertoire. These cautions on the application of the concept of culture crystallization do not necessarily indicate its complete rejection. Other factors to be considered are the date of this investigation and the intensity of recent change. Stabilization and crystallization of the fishing repertoire may well have occurred during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and the marked changes now apparent may be due in largest part to the influence of commercialization which was initiated in the nineteenth century (from Italian sources) and intensified in this century (from North American and Japanese sources). Careful historical investigation might well reveal a complicated process in which the aboriginal techniques were first influenced by Iberian ones, followed by a period of stabilization, renewed influences and change in the nineteenth century, fol- lowed by stabilization of forms currently considered "conservative," and a later period of influence and change over the last few decades. Thus, cultural crystal- lization, if it took place, may have been a recurrent phenomenon, although it would have been most clearly demonstrable before 1800, a period in which fishing techniques seem to have been extremely conservative. Certainly, it is an oversimplification to regard the totality of modern Peruvian fishing either as a con- servative, aboriginally based complex with a few European additions, or merely as a reduced set of Iberian introductions; the processes of diffusion and acceptance have been complicated and have proceeded at different rates and along different courses in the several subareas of the complex. The difficulties in historical interpretation stem from three major sources. First, our knowledge of the number and distribution of currently used types of equipment and social features is not complete, al- though information for Iberia is better than for Peru. Second, our knowledge of the history of the techno- logical inventory is faulty, often nonexistent, in most areas. This last point is crucial in assessing the degree of culture crystallization; Iberian technology was certainly not static during the colonial period, and it may not be legitimate to employ information from the late colonial period or from recent times to reconstruct the early colonial situation on the basis of assumed conservatism. Similarities between Latin American and Spanish technologies might well be the result of later dissemination, either from Iberia to the New World or from some third area to both of these. Third, our understanding of the processes by which diffusion occurred, particularly in terms of the social relations between the participating elements of the donor and recipient populations, is markedly lim- ited. Much of the technological information involved in fishing and sailing must have passed from subordi- nate segments of Spanish society to the lower elements of the colonial hierarchy (see also Foster, 1960; 85). On the other hand, a variety of changes, perhaps largely the later ones, may have been introduced by 2 24 HAMMEL AND HAASE: PERUVIAN FISHING COMMUNITIES persons of high status interested in economic reform in a general sense, or by entrepreneurs seeking to modernize the fishing industry and make exploitation of the resources more efficient for commercial pur- poses. Ignoring these factors would be equivalent to a historical description of English agriculture which took account only of the basic Neolithic and Bronze Age heritage of the British Isles. We have very little knowledge of the socio-psychological mechanisms, such as degree of prestige emulation, which may have been involved in these processes, even if within a frame- work of possibilities established by a reduced conquest culture and by whatever crystallization of the combined inventories may have occurred. Clearly, then, the results of this survey and its attendant speculations can only be offered as a contri- bution to the eventual, even if partial, illumination of the historical processes considered. We will be grati- fied if the next ethnographer to investigate Latin Ameri- can fishing will have, as a result of our work, a better concept of what questions need be asked. The precise nature of these questions will, of course, differ with the interests and theoretical orientation of the investi- gator. For those interested primarily in historical reconstruction from distribution and the specification of technological detail, it will clearly be necessary to achieve a more detailed statement of material items with accurate provenience than was possible on our brief survey. Particular attention should be paid to the degree and nature of subtypical variation in arti- fact types and to the precise specification of tasks in which these artifacts are employed. On a more direct historical plane, we suggest that the archives of local capitanias will provide much useful information, par- ticularly of a demographic nature, which may indicate the variations in intensity with which fishing has been practiced over the years. Of further interest, particu- larly to the social anthropologist, would be an accurate statement of the functioning of one or more of these fishing communities, especially of one closely linked with other aspects of local economy and social life. Rural settlements on the Peruvian coast are all very much part-societies; some fishing communities, as noted, are but parts of these. The description of the structure of social relations in and between such com- munities would constitute a problem of particular interest. If these kinds of data were available, our notions of persistence, selection, and crystallization, and of economic advantage and functional interrelation- ship might be more incisively employed. APPENDIX DESCRIPTIONS OF SOME COMMUNITIES SURVEYED The information given below covers only those com- munities on which adequate information was available. Further, the data on population and distribution of arti- facts must be employed with some caution. Population figures are given in three ways: the number of houses of fishermen, the number of active fishermen, or the total population economically dependent on fishing in a direct sense. There is some relationship between these kinds of data: generally, there are about five or six persons in a house, and often two or three of these will be fishermen. Nevertheless, the data are given in their original form, with no attempt made to convert to a standard measure on the basis of these vague equivalents. Clearly, all population figures are esti- mates and must be used with caution on that account; the most reliable figures are those on the number of houses, since these were often counted by the investi- gators themselves. Information on the use or nonuse of particular arti- facts, or their presence or absence in the past in a community are also subject to revision. These state- ments are abstracted from the testimony of informants given in short interviews with little or no opportunity to check the data from one informant against those from another. Additionally, the complexity of variation in nonaboriginal boat types, the lack of a standardized terminology for these along the coast, and the neces- sity for considerable expertise in identifying them are such that the descriptions of water craft given are much simplified. We refer to chalanas, meaning all small, row- boat-like craft, lanchas, meaning larger hulls, usually of felucca lines and with inboard engines, and botes, meaning the hull usually found bearing a lugsail in north- ern Peru. Communities are listed from south to north. LAGUNA GRANDE. 22 houses. Total permanent population is 60 persons, seasonal peak is 300. Prin- cipal techniques are the red, cordel, harpon, and chispa. Caballitos are not present; the only local boat type is the chalana, with an outboard motor. Oars and sail are used in emergencies. SAN ANDRES. 840 houses. Total permanent popu- lation is ca. 5,000. Principal techniques include the red, chinchorro, espinel, cordel, and harp6n. The arrastre is used for shellfish, as are skin- and suit- divers. Principal boat types are the chalana with out- board and the lancha with inboard engine. Sails are no longer used as the prime source of power. Social relationships between San Andres and Laguna Grande are close. TAMBO DE MORA. 100 houses. Principal tech- niques include the red and espinel. Cordel and chispa are little used; neither the chinchorro nor the harpon are employed. Principal craft are the chalana and lancha, as at San Andres. Fishing is reported as hav- ing declined markedly in the last few years. 225 ANTHROPOLOGICAL RECORDS JAHUAY. 6 houses. Fishing is largely for subsis- tence. The principal net is the chinchorro, with minor use of the red. The espinel and cordel are also used, from the beach only. The harp6n is also employed. Caballitos are the only craft. CERRO AZUL. 100 permanent fishermen with an equal number added in the peak season. Principal techniques include the espinel, cordel, red, and chin- chorro. The harp6n is not used. Caballitos are not used, and lanchas are only occasionally found. The principal craft is the zapato chalana. ASIA. 50 houses. Fishing is slightly commercial- ized, most sales occurring in the community itself, to buyers or passers-by. The chinchorro, cordel, espinel, red, and harpon are all employed. The cabal- lito is the only craft. PUCUSANA. 100 fishermen. Fishing is largely commercial. The red, cordel, espinel, muestra, and harp6n are all employed. Lanchas with inboard engines are common; many of these are fitted with a glass- bottomed box in the hull which aids in spearing flatfish. ANCON. 200 fishermen. Principal techniques are the cordel, red, muestra, harp6n, espinel, trampilla, trasmallo, arrastra, and chinchorro de arrastre. Prin- cipal craft are the chalana and lancha. Caballitos are not used; canoas were used formerly as were balsas. PUERTO CHANCAY. 100 fishermen. Principal tech- niques include the red, atarraya, trasmallo, cordel, espinel, muestra, and occasional harpon. Chalanas and lanchas, almost always with inboard motors, are the only craft. (Lanchas without motors are called "buse- tas. ") Caballitos, balsas, and canoas were used form- erly but are no longer. PUERTO DE HUACHO. 2,000 fishermen (this is the figure given, but it seems high). Fishing is distinctly commercial, with much of the catch destined for fac- tory processing. Principal techniques are the boliche, red, chinchorro, chinchorro de arrastre, atarraya, trasmallo, cordel, espinel, robadera; the harpon is rare. Craft include the chalana, the lancha, and the bote (with motor but not with sail). No aboriginal craft persist. (Raimondi, 1942, I: 88 reports dugout canoes.) SUPE. 40 houses of resident fishermen, although their number is augmented by frequent visitors. Princi- pal techniques are the cordel, red, espinel, chinchorro, and muestra. The harp6n is not used. Lanchas with a felucca hull are common; balsas are also found. PUERTO CHICO. 60 houses. Principal techniques include the chinchorro, red, espinel, and anchovetera. Principal craft are the chalana and lancha, all with inboard engines. Balsas and canoas were employed but have fallen into disuse; caballitos were never used. PUERTO HUARMEY. 30 houses, 100 fishermen. Fishing is distinctly commercial, with the catch going to a local factory. The boliche is the principal com- mercial technique, although the cordel, red, trasmallo, chinchorro, espinel, and atarraya are also found. Prin- cipal craft are the chalana and lancha, both with inboard engines. Caballitos were never used. HUANCHAQUITO. 6 houses. The inhabitants also farm and keep chickens and goats. Balsas of a crude variety, without sails, are the only craft. The princi- pal technique seems to be the cordel. LOS CHINOS. 44 houses; 60 permanent fishermen; 5 temporary fishermen. There is some minor use of the chinchorro from the shore, as well as some use of the trasmallo. Principal techniques are the red, cordel, espinel, muestra, and atarraya. The lancha is the only craft. Caballitos were used formerly, but canoas and balsas never were. CHIMBOTE. 2,000 fishermen. Fishing is heavily commercial, most of the catch being processed in a local factory. The principal techniques are the boliche, red, chinchorro, cordel, and muestra. The atarraya and harpon are not used; the espinel is rarely employed. Caballitos were used formerly, but no aboriginal craft are found today. The commonest hull for fishing is the bote, with inboard motor; chalanas are used only for transportation and lightering minor cargo. GUANAPE. 6 houses. Fishing is at a subsistence level. The commonest technique is the chinchorro, with some use of red, cordel, espinel, and muestra. Some chalanas are used, but the commonest craft is the caballito. PUERTO MOORIN. 2 houses. Fishing is at a sub- sistence level. The commonest technique is the chin- chorro, with some use of cordel and muestra. The red, harpon, and trasmallo are not used. Most fishing is done from the beach, although the chalana is occasion- ally used. SALAVERRY. Minor line-fishing from the pier by visitors. LAS DELICIAS. The community reported by Gillin (1947) appears to have disappeared. Some Mocheros fish from the beach, but there is no permanent settle- ment. HUANCHACO. 100 fishermen. Much of the fishing is commercial, but not for processing in a factory. The commonest techniques are the red, chinchorro, espinel, cordel, harp6n, trasmallo, and atarraya. Cabal- litos are common, but botes and lanchas are also used. Sails are rare; power is generally provided by inboard motors. Balsas and canoas were never used at this port. PUERTO CHICAMA. Very little fishing. PACASMAYO. Fishing has markedly declined; only 3 fishermen go out, and they only occasionally. PUERTO ETEN. 4 houses. Very few fishermen live at the port, although it is visited by others from Santa Rosa, San Jose, and Pimentel. Techniques described include the red, chinchorro, atarraya, cordel, espinel, and harpon. The trasmallo and muestra were not used. Lanchas, caballitos, and botes were reported but sails were said to be rare. Balsas and canoas were never used at this port. SANTA ROSA. 500 fishermen. Much of the fishing is for the market. Principal techniques include the 226 HAMMEL AND HAASE: PERUVIAN FISHING COMMUNITIES chinchorro, red, chinchorro de arrastre, cordel, espi- nel, muestra, atarraya, and harpon. The trasmallo was not used. The principal craft is the bote, used with motor and sail together. PIMENTEL. Conditions are similar to those at Santa Rosa, although relatively few fishermen live at Pimentel. SAN JOSE. 500 fishermen. The chinchorro is little used, the chinchorro de arrastre not at all. The atarraya, cordel, espinel, and harpon are the common- est implements. In other respects the community is similar to Santa Rosa. Informants reported that canoas and balsas had never been used here. PARACHIQUE. 70 houses. Similar in all respects to Constante. CONSTANTE. 35 houses with all inhabitants from Sechura. Fishing tends to be local and is done princi- pally with the red and chinchorro. Rayfish are heavily fished; hence the greater use of the red here compared to Matacaballo. Craft are the bote with sail and the balsa, itself often used with sail. MATACABALLO. 20 houses with all inhabitants from Sechura. The atarraya, cordel, and harpon are the commonest implements, with some use of the muestra The red is rare, used only for rayfish, which are not commonly fished at this point. The espinel is not used. Most of the fishing from Matacaballo is done on long-distance trips on which the commonest imple- ment is the cordel. Fish are dried and salted and taken to market either via Sechura and into Piura, or are sold in Eten, Pimentel, and nearby ports, having been dried during the voyage. Fishing trips are made in botes with sail only; lanchas, caballitos, and cha- lanas are not used. Balsas are used for minor inshore fishing and as life rafts on the botes. CHULLIYAC HE. Similar to Constante. PAITA. 30 houses. Most of the fishermen are from Sechura; only a few are from Paita. The principal implements are the red, atarraya, cordel, espinel, muestra, and chinchorro. The harp6n and trampilla are not used. Botes carry sails or sails and inboard motors; balsas are also used. Canoas are not found. COLAN. 25 houses. Chalanas are found here; balsas were used but are now absent. Common imple- ments are the red (called atamila), the chinchorro (the bolsa being called buche), the atarraya, harpon, cordel, and muestra. The trasmallo is not employed. NEGRITOS and north. (These data were obtained from the Capitania of Talara.) Population figures for numbers of resident fishermen are as follows: NEGRITOS LOBITOS TALARA CABO BLANCO LOS ORGANOS MANCORA CANOAS 64 72 238 82 12 250 70 Fishing at most points is for subsistence or direct sale without factory processing. However, fishing at Talara and Mancora is factory-oriented, particularly as far as shark and swordfish are concerned. Cabo Blanco is a sport-fishing center. All points are char- acterized by lack of the red and by common use of cordel, a trolled lure (muestra a la carrera), espinel, atarraya, chinchorro, and the harp6n. Boat types are the bote with sail alone and the balsa, except at Talara, Mancora, and Cabo Blanco, where power boats, often specialized commercial ones, are encountered. Many of the fishermen, particularly in the southern section of this stretch of coast, are descended from Sechu- ranos; key last names which identify them are Flores, Periches, Rumiches, Eches, Ramirez, Fiesta, and Purisaca. PUERTO PIZARRO. 30 fishermen. Common imple- ments are the cordel, atarraya, harpon (spear) and harpon (harpoon), as well as the rel. The chinchorro is rarely used. Local fishermen use only the canoas, although the port is visited by fishermen in other hulls, notably from Mancora. Pizarro is a favorite spot for careening and cleaning vessels from the south. 227 BIBLIOGRAPHY Acosta, Jose de 1894. Historia natural y moral de las Indias. 2 vols. Madrid. (First published in Seville, 1590.) Anonymous 1953. Yale fishes the Humboldt Current. Yale Alumni Magazine, 17:1, October. New Haven. .nci.eta C., Felipe 1952. El atun de aleta amarilla. Pesca y Caza, 5:3-22. Ministerio de Agricultura, Direcci6n de Pesqueria y Caza, Lima. Bennett, Wendell C. and Junius B. Bird 1949. Andean culture history. American Museum of Natural History, Handbook Series, No. 15. New York. Bird, Junius B. 1946. The cultural sequence of the north Chilean coast. Handbook of South American Indians, Julian H. Steward, ed., Bulletin 143, vol. 2, pp. 587-594. Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology. Washington. Cobo, P. Bernabe 1956. Obras del P. Bernabe Cobo de la Compainia de Jesu's. Estudio preliminar y edicion del P. Francisco Mateos de la misma companiia. 2 vols. Biblioteca de autores espaiioles desde la formacion del lenguaje hasta nues- tros dias. Vols. 91-92. Madrid. Coe, Michael D. 1960. Archaeological linkages with North and South America at La Victoria, Guatemala. Ameri- can Anthropologist, 62:363-393. Coker, R. E. 1910. The fisheries and the guano industries of Peru. Proceedings of the 4th International Fishery Congress. Bulletin of the U. S. Bureau of Fisheries, vol. 28, 1908, pp. 333- 365. Dampier, William 1927. A new voyage round the world. London. (Originally published 1697.) Edwards, Clinton R. 1960. Sailing rafts of Sechura: history and prob- lems of origin. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, 16:368-391. MS Small craft of western South America. Doctoral dissertation in Geography at the University of California, Berkeley. In preparation. Engel, Frederic 1957. Early sites on the Peruvian coast. South- western Journal of Anthropology, 13:54-68. Estrada, Emilio 1957. Los Huancavilcas: uiltimas civilizaciones pre- hist6ricas de la costa del Guayas. Publica- ciones del Museo Victor Emilio Estrada, no. 3. Fiedler, Reginald H. 1943. La pesca y las industrias pesqueras en el Peru, con recomendaciones para su futuro desarollo. (With Norman D. Jarvis and Milton J. Lobell.) Translated by E. C. Evans. Informe presentado por los miembros de la misi6n americana del "Fish and Wildlife Service" del Departamento del Interior de los Estados Unidos del America, contratada por el Supremo Gobierno del Peru el anio 1941. Companiia Administradora del Guano, Lima. 1944. The Peruvian fisheries. Geographical Re- view, 34:96-119. Foster, George M. 1960. Culture and conquest: America's Spanish heritage. Viking Fund Publications in Anthro- pology, no. 27. Garcilaso de la Vega, Inca 1945. Comentarios reales de los Incas. 2d ed. Buenos Aires. Gillin, John 1947. Moche: A Peruvian coastal community. Smithsonian Institution, Institute of Social Anthropology, Publication No. 3. Gutierrez de Santa Clara, Pedro 1905. Historia de las guerras civiles del Peru (1544-1548) y de otros sucesos de las Indias. Vol. 3. Madrid. Hall, Basil 1824. Extracts from a journal written on the coasts of Chili, Peru, and Mexico in the years 1820, 1821, 1822. 2d ed. 2 vols. Edinburgh. Hammel, E. A. 1962. Wealth, authority, and prestige in the Ica Valley, Peru. University of New Mexico Publications in Anthropology, No. 10. Albuquerque. Hartmann, Gerd 1958. Apuntes sobre la biologia del camaron del rio, Cryphiops caementarius (molina), Palae- monidae, Decapoda. Pesca y Caza, 8:14-28. Ministerio de Agricultura, Direcci6n de Pesqueria y Caza, Lima. Hutchinson, Thomas J. 1873. Two years in Peru with exploration of its antiquities. 2 vols. London. [ 228 ] HAMMEL AND HAASE: PERUVIAN FISHING COMMUNITIES Hildebrand, S. F. 1946. A descriptive catalog of the shore fishes of Peru. U. S. National Museum, Smithsonian Institution, Bulletin 189. Washington. Kostritsky, Leon 1955. Hallazgos arquel6gicos que demuestran la existencia de un antiqulsimo pueblo pescador. Pesca y Caza, 6:51-59. Ministerio de Agri- cultura, Direcci6n de Pesqueri'a y Caza. Lima. Lanning, Edward Putnam MS Chronological and cultural relationships of early pottery styles in ancient Peru. Doc- toral dissertation submitted to the University of California, Berkeley, 1960. 656 numbered leaves. Larco Hoyle, Rafael 1960. La cultura Santa. In Antiguo Peru6: Espacio y Tiempo, pp. 235-239. Ramiro Matos Mendieta, ed. Lima. Lothrop, S. K. 1932. Aboriginal navigation off the west coast of South America. Journal of the Royal Anthro- pological Institute of Great Britain and Ire- land, 62:229-256. Martlnez Compani6n, D. Baltasar Jaime 1936. Trujillo del Peru' a fines del siglo XVIII. Madrid. Means, Philip Ainsworth 1942. Pre-Spanish navigation off the Andean coast. The American Neptune, 2:3:1-20. Middendorf, E. W. 1894. Peru. Beobachtungen und Studien aber das Land und seine Bewohner wahrend eines 25-jahrige Aufenthalts. Vol. 2: Das Kiusten- land von Peru. Berlin. Murphy, Robert C. 1925. The bird islands of Peru: the record of a sojourn on the west coast. New York. Peru 1950- 1956. Peces comunes de la costa peruana (Parts 1-7.) Pesca y Caza, 1-7. Ministerio de Agricultura, Direcci6n de Pesquerla y Caza. Lima. Porter, David 1822. Journal of a cruise made to the Pacific Ocean by Captain David Porter in the United States Frigate Essex in the years 1812, 1813, and 1814. 2d ed. 2 vols. New York. Raimondi, Antonio 1942. Notas de viajes para su obra "El Peru1." 4 vols. Lima. Rodriguez Santamaria, Benigno 1927. Diccionario de artes de pesca en Espana y sus posesiones. Madrid. Ruschenberger, W. S. W. 1834. Three years in the Pacific, including notices of Brazil, Chile, Bolivia, and Peru. Philadelphia. (Author's name is given in the volume only as "An Officer of the United States Navy.") Schweigger, Erwin 1943. Pesqueria y oceanografia del Perui y proposi- ciones para su desarollo futuro. Compa?la Administradora del Guano. Lima. Shelvocke, George 1726. A voyage round the world by way of the great south sea. London. Stevenson, W. B. 1829. Historical and descriptive narrative of twenty years' residence in South America. 3 vols. London. Tschudi, J. J. 1847. Travels in Peru during the years 1838-1842. Translated by Thomasina Ross. New York. Uhle, Max 1906. Los kjokkenmoedings del Peru . Revista Hist6rica, Organo del Instituto Historico del Peru. Vol. 1, trimester 1, pp. 2-23. Lima. Vasquez de Espinosa, Antonio 1948. Compendio y descripcion de las Indias occi- dentales. Smithsonian Institution, Miscel- laneous Collections, vol. 108. Washington. Willey, Gordon 1955. The interreiated rise of the native cultures of middle and South America. New inter- pretations of Aboriginal American Culture History. 75th Anniversary Volume of the Anthropological Society of Washington. 229