Vital Diplomacy: The Ritual Everyday on a Dammed River in Amazonia

VITAL DIPLOMACY

Ethnography, Theory, Experiment

Series Editors:

Martin Holbraad, Department of Anthropology, University College London Morten Axel Pedersen, Department of Anthropology, University of Copenhagen Rane Willerslev, Museum of Cultural History, University of Oslo

In recent years, ethnography has been increasingly recognized as a core method for generating qualitative data within the social sciences and humanities. This series explores a more radical, methodological potential of ethnography: its role as an arena of theoretical experimentation. It includes volumes that call for a rethinking of the relationship between ethnography and theory in order to question, and experimentally transform, existing understandings of the contemporary world.

Volume 1

AN ANTHROPOLOGICAL TROMPE L’OEIL FOR A COMMON WORLD

AN ESSAY ON THE ECONOMY OF KNOWLEDGE

By Alberto Corsín Jiménez

Volume 2

FIGURATIONS OF THE FUTURE

FORMS AND TEMPORALITIES OF LEFT RADICAL POLITICS IN NORTHERN EUROPE

By Stine Krøijer

Volume 3

WATERWORLDS

ANTHROPOLOGY IN FLUID ENVIRONMENTS

Edited by Kirsten Hastrup and Frida Hastrup

Volume 4

VIOLENT BECOMINGS

STATE FORMATION, SOCIALITY, AND POWER IN MOZAMBIQUE

By Bjørn Enge Bertelsen

Volume 5

VITAL DIPLOMACY

THE RITUAL EVERYDAY ON A DAMMED RIVER IN AMAZONIA

By Chloe Nahum-Claudel

VITAL DIPLOMACY

The Ritual Everyday on a Dammed River in Amazonia

By Chloe Nahum-Claudel

First published in 2018 by

Berghahn Books

www.berghahnbooks.com

© 2018, 2024 Chloe Nahum-Claudel

First paperback edition published in 2024

All rights reserved. Except for the quotation of short passages for the purposes of criticism and review, no part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system now known or to be invented, without written permission of the publisher.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

A C.I.P. cataloging record is available from the Library of Congress

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN 978-1-78533-406-1 hardback

ISBN 978-1-80539-125-8 paperback

ISBN 978-1-80539-384-9 epub

ISBN 978-1-78533-407-8 web pdf

https://doi.org/10.3167/9781785334061

CONTENTS

List of Illustrations

Acknowledgements

A Note on Language

Map

Introduction

Chapter 1. Mastery and Subjection at the Fishing Dams

Chapter 2. The Fishermen Return ‘Like Yakairiti’

Chapter 3. Routine Ritualism and a Festival of Abundance

Chapter 4. Affinal Diplomacy in a United, Egalitarian Society

Chapter 5. Cosmic Diplomacy: Cooking, Curing and Crafting Human Life

Chapter 6. Yankwa’s Foreign Diplomacy and Saluma’s Defiance

Bibliography

Index

ILLUSTRATIONS

1.1 On 18 February 2008 women look on as Yankwa’s fleets prepare for departure to the fishing dams.

1.2 Harvesting fish from the dam’s traps.

1.3 Building a fishing dam (wayti) in six archetypal steps.

1.4 The encampment downstream of Maxikyawina’s dam.

1.5 On the day the traps penetrate, men carry their newly crafted traps to their positions.

2.1 Yankwa’s fishermen return from the dams decked out in palm fronds and mud.

2.2 The hosts, known as Halokwayti, re-enter the flute house at the end of their entertaining afternoon circuit.

2.3 The hosts gather in the flute house in readiness to meet the incoming fishermen in the village arena.

2.4 My adoptive younger brother Salika (left) and his nephew and co-resident playmate Anowlie are happily reunited after Salika’s absence at the fishing dam. Anowlie looks ‘hostly’ like his father, while Salika’s fringe has grown long and he is covered in black genipap.

3.1 Men’s nightly flute playing winds down after dawn in February 2009 as Yankwa prepare to depart for the fishing dams.

3.2 Women arrange themselves around the heap of tubers to grate manioc together. They have straight backs and straight legs and pivot from the hips.

3.3 Calabashes piled with yams are put outside the front door by the wife of a Kairoli clansman for the pet-flute Tawado-kwase.

4.1 Women ‘do the rounds’ of others’ houses to reclaim their set of calabashes after approximately 4,000 litres of ketera has circulated on the day of the fishermen’s return. In the foreground a bunch of women stop to inspect calabashes carried by others. In the background, another line of women walk between houses with their own bundles.

4.2 The movement of calabashes from the dwelling circle to the arena and back again.

4.3 Inside the flute house the flutes belonging to nine clans are arrayed around a central pillar.

4.4 On 28 June 2009 women enter the arena after cleaning Kawinyalili clan’s manioc field. They have stopped on their way for a collective beautification.

5.1 A typically laden hearth.

5.2 Applying layers of ash and blood-like dye to new calabashes.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This book is based on sixteen months’ fieldwork in the Enawenê-nawê village of Halataikwa, concentrated in 2008–2009 while I was a Ph.D. student in the Department of Social Anthropology at the University of Cambridge. The research was made possible by a grant from the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) in the UK. The book was written during three years spent as Trebilcock-Newton Research Fellow at Pembroke College, Cambridge, and one year spent as a research fellow at the EHESS in Paris. I am grateful to all these institutions.

Most of all I thank the Enawenê-nawê. While my stay was just a blip in time from the perspective of the community, for me it was the whole world – a break in time, the closure of my previous life, and an opening to the future. This book is dedicated to them. I hope that some of their wisdom is faithfully interpreted. In their remarkably solidary community I learnt from everyone, but various people also showed me particular love and compassion. In particular, the woman I called mother, Kawalinero-asero fed and comforted me daily; her daughters, Atolohe-neto, Kawalinero-neto, Yokwali-neto, Menakalose-neto, Maxiolo, Mamiro, and their children were constant companions. Their husbands helped me in many ways. Circling the village I would like to thank a few others into whose houses I ventured most often to ask questions or pass the time: Sotailiti and his household; Kawekwa-atokwe; Kamerose-atokwe and Kamerose-asero, and their daughters and sons-in-law.

My greatest intellectual and personal debt is to my Ph.D. supervisor Stephen Hugh-Jones for his clarity of thought as a teacher and writer, and his kindness and generosity as a person. In Cambridge I also thank Barbara Bodenhorn, Martin Holbraad, Marilyn Strathern, Francoise Barbira-Freedman, Piers Vitebsky and Rupert Stasch for their mentorship over the years.

I lived for long periods between 2006 and 2010 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and the people I met there had a major influence on my life and my anthropology, and supported me in many practical and emotional ways. My fieldwork would have been impossible without the support of Eduardo Viveiros de Castro. In 2006 he welcomed me into his seminars at the Museu Nacional and introduced me to students and colleagues who became my friends and interlocutors. My research authorisation would never have been granted by the National Counsel for Technological and Scientific Development (CNPq) and the Agency for Indigenous Affairs (FUNAI) if it had not been for his guidance and tenacity through the process. I also thank Marcio Silva, another ethnographer of the Enawenê, for his good advice; Aparecida Vilaça for her ongoing inspiration and support; Marcio Goldman and Tania Stolze-Lima for conversation and hospitality; and for friendship and anthropological stimulus I thank Flavio Gordon, Fernanda Chinelli, Jose-Antonio Kelly, Julia Sauma, Guillerme Orlandini Heurich, Antonia Walford, Luana Almeida, Laura Lowenkron, Luciana França and Eduardo Dullo.

In Mato Grosso I thank Ivar Busatto, the director of OPAN, for access to the library in Cuiabá to consult materials on the Enawenê. Antonio Carlos de Aquino, the head of FUNAI in Juína, was always judicious in negotiations that arose between myself and the Enawenê. At FUNAI in Brasilia Giovana Acácia Tempesta helped me to access archives held there on the Enawenê.

Specific chapters of the book have benefited from comments at various stages. The Introduction benefited from astute readings by Michael Scott, Taras Fedirko, Anthony Pickles and Sertaç Sehlikoglu. Chapter 1 has improved following input from Kenny Calderón-Corredor, the Magic Circle in Cambridge, and the Seminar of Americanist Anthropology in Paris. I developed Chapter 3 on the basis of a seminar presentation at the University of San Diego in 2011, where Joel Robbins provided important feedback and conversations with Rupert Stasch did much to further my thinking. Chapter 5 benefited from the engaged reading of Milena Estorniolo. Chapter 4 profited from comments received at the Social Anthropology seminar at Durham University and the Kinship and Relational Logics seminar of Klaus Hamberger at the EHESS. The whole book is better thanks to Jessica Johnson’s careful reading of an earlier version of the manuscript. Morten Pedersen, one of the three editors of this book series, provided sharp editorial feedback, which helped restructure and orient the manuscript following peer review. I also thank the two anonymous reviewers for their useful appraisals.

Various parts of the book improved thanks to input from my Ph.D. examiners, Philippe Erikson and Marilyn Strathern, and to conversations with Cédric Yvinec, Olivier Allard, Johanna Gonçalvez-Martin, and Jeanne Pensard-Besson. For copy editing I thank Max Webster, Autumn Green, Caryl Williams, Gillian Nahum and Pia Spry-Marquez. In addition I give special thanks to my mother, Gillian Nahum, for her faithful snail-mail correspondence throughout my fieldwork and for her belief in me, which has given me courage.

Finally, to Anthony Pickles. I carried the memory of our meeting through fieldwork in 2008–2009, and returned to the UK in 2010 to find him again. I thank him for sharing his intelligence, love and humour and for all the joys of our life together.

A NOTE ON LANGUAGE

The field research on which this book is based was conducted in the Enawenê-nawê’s Arawakan language, which I learned to speak at a basic level through immersion and without systematic teaching or linguistic analysis. Except for personal names all foreign terms are italicised and translated the first time they are used in each chapter but are not italicised in subsequent usage.

In the past, the ethnonym Enawenê-nawê has been written Enauenê-Nauê or Enawene-Nawe. The correct pronunciation is with the primary stress at the end of each word and a secondary stress on the very first syllable: (e.,na.we.’ne) (na’we) (Rezende 2006: 5). I opt not to capitalise the second word because -nawe is a collectivising suffix meaning ‘people’, which creates various noun classes. I exclude the - nawê suffix throughout the book, using the abbreviated form ‘Enawenê’, as people themselves often do. This makes for easier reading and allows me to use the form ‘Enawenê people’, Enawenê women (Enawenê-nero) or Enawenê men (Enawenê-nawê) in which a translation substitutes the suffix. Indeed, many nouns are gendered, -o endings are feminine and -e endings masculine (e.g. blessing shaman: hoanaytalo/hoanaytale).

In the rare cases that I use names these are people’s actual names. In fact, Enawenê people accumulate names through the life course and are known by different names contextually. Enawenê adults are generally called by parental or grandparental teknonyms, usually after the first child born to a couple, or their first grandchild. The gender and generation of a person referred to in the book can thus be inferred from the suffix: -ene means father, -eneto mother, -atokwe grandfather, and -asero grandmother.

The orthography of the Enawenê-nawê language is not firmly established. Spelling variations abound among authors; for example, the name of the ritual that is the subject of this book has been represented in various ways: Iyaõkwa (Almeida 2011), Yãkwa (Mendes dos Santos 2006). I prefer the approximation Yankwa for its simplicity for the reader of English. In general I have tended to minimise use of accenting compared to my Portuguese-speaking colleagues. As such, my representation of the language is only loosely based on Rezende’s (2006) phonology.

I use a broad phonemic transcription composed of the following symbols: a, b, d, e, h, i, k, kw, ky, l, m, n, ñ, o, r, s, t, w, x, y. Primary stress falls on one of the two final syllables of a word, and most often the last. Some of the main sound variations are as follows: b and w are variant sounds of the same phoneme at the beginning of words e.g. bera, wera (cooking hearth structure); biyti, wayti (dam). Between vowels, w and m are interchangeable e.g. kawinalili, kaminalili (clan name). d, l are variant sounds of the same phoneme at the beginning of words e.g. lerohi, derohi (name of ritual). l and r are allophones e.g. Kawali, Kawari (man’s name), halikale, harikare (host). i and e are allophones e.g. esewehe, esewehe (salt), awale, awali (beautiful). The diphthong [aj] can be represented ai or ay.

Map situating Enawenê-nawê territory in Brazil. Map by Philip Stickler.

Introduction

The fish had not come. By the end of April 2009 the five teams of Enawenê-nawê fishermen had tended their fishing dams for nine weeks as opposed to the usual six. They had waited in vain for shoals of migrating fish to rush noisily into them. The dearth was due to the advancing construction of a string of hydroelectric dams on the upper reaches of the Juruena River, located in Mato Grosso state, an economic frontier region of Brazil. The Juruena flows north to feed the Tapajós and then the Amazon itself. It is one of many Amazonian rivers where the Brazilian government has incentivised the generation of hydropower. Living at this new resource frontier, in 2009 the Enawenê found themselves lacking sufficient fish for the ritual season’s climactic feasts. In response, pioneering fishermen left their fishing dam to travel to the fast-growing town of Juína, the centre of the agribusiness and cattle industries that dominate the region, in order to buy fish from an aquafarm. They persuaded agents from the government agency that assists the country’s indigenous population to advance 12,000 reals for the purchase. The advance was taken from the 1.5 million real compensation agreement that Enawenê representatives had just signed, after fraught negotiations, in exchange for the building of eight hydroelectric dams.

At the bridge that carries the region’s main road over the River Juruena, the fishermen took delivery of three tons of an artificially cross-bred fish from a refrigerated lorry. Located approximately 100 miles upstream of the Enawenê’s single village on the small, winding, Iquê River, this bridge was a significant place on the Enawenê landscape. It was here that they mounted road blocks to make demands of government, and from here that they travelled by road to meetings in the local, regional and national capitals of Juína, Cuiabá and Brasilia. While the bridge was thus routinely a place for the negotiation of resources and recognition, this was the first time it had staged a handover of fish.

In a forest clearing near the bridge the fishermen arranged the fish in flattened baskets made from palm materials and smoked it on wooden racks, just as they would have done if the fish had been caught in their dams’ traps. However, given the fishermen’s already prolonged absence that year, they were in haste to return to the village. Instead of leaving the fish to smoke and cure gradually over weeks, they roasted it for just 24 hours before loading it into their outboard-powered aluminium boats for the seven hour journey home. By the time the fishermen greeted their wives, the strange-looking ‘foreign fish’ (iñoti kohase) – as women immediately took to calling it – already smelled pungent. Women spat on the floor and exclaimed with disgust that it was rotting. They urgently erected smoking racks and lit fires to prevent the fish from spoiling completely. When they tentatively tasted the foreign fish they commented on its oily texture. There were many complaints of aching stomachs in the following days. I had never received so many meals of fish coupled with manioc bread, since this foreign fish was said to be good for a ‘foreign woman’ (iñoti-nero) to eat. In the days of intense commerce that always followed the fishermen’s return from their dams, women kept the slowly smoked fish that had been caught in the dams’ traps separate from this oily foreign fish. They chose the former for the payments they busily distributed to their affines, to secure their children’s betrothals and fix their patrilineal clan names.

That year I had accompanied a team of twelve fishermen to the most distant of the five dams constructed by the men of Yankwa, as the fishermen are known. As they tended empty traps and were denied the fortifying meals that should have followed the hard work of building a dam out of wood and vines in a rushing river, the team had struggled to keep up the light-hearted ribaldry that is supposed to characterise encampment sociality. Before I left them to return to the women in the village – I was dispirited, hungry and eager to escape the tense and frustrated atmosphere at the failing dam – I counted just forty-four flattened baskets of fish in the two watertight smokehouses the men had constructed in preparation for smoking a prodigious haul.

After the same period in 1981 there had been nearly a thousand such baskets at one dam, not including all that the men had unrestrainedly feasted upon. We know this because Vincent Cañas, the Jesuit missionary who lived with the Enawenê for a decade after contact in 1974, kept a careful record of the catch. In 1985 he gave up counting the fish by day ten when ‘all along the dam there are shoals of fish who want to descend the river’. A decade later, in 1994, a biologist working with the mission’s laicised successor NGO, Operação Amazônia Nativa (OPAN), weighed the returned fishermen’s dry catch. He estimated a total production of 18 tons of fresh fish from three dams (Costa Júnior 1995b). This puts the three tons of farmed fish purchased in 2009 into perspective, and demonstrates that 2009 was a new and drastic low in what, by all accounts, had been a gradual reduction in fishing yields.

On a brief visit to the River Arimena’s fishing dam in 2008 I had witnessed the riot of fecundity as the fish shoaled into the traps, and the elation and bodily vigour of men and their growing sons. As I took my leave from another dam in 2009 the dam’s leader, who had been my host, confided to me his anxiety. He was faced with the prospect of returning to the ritual hosts in the village with a pitiful catch. He worried over the pairs of fish that he would have to hand to each one of the men of three hosting clans on the evening of the return, and then of the same number of the larger, flattened baskets he needed to distribute the following morning. However, the lack of fish was more than a lack of exchange currency. The success of dam fishing is at once a barometer for the quality of relations among the team of fishermen, their ability to realise the will of powerful ancestors, and to forge an alliance with the spirit masters of the fish. The dam’s leader asked me a series of rhetorical questions that expressed this frustrated efficacy: had I noticed that all the men had finished weaving a second round of sieves for their wives? But had I heard him calling out for the men to ‘fetch firewood!’ ‘Fetch palm leaves to make the smoking baskets!’? And had I seen him running into the encampment to motivate everyone to get to work gutting and smoking the fish? Crafting tools like manioc sieves and graters, and ornaments like bead-chains for their wives, was supposed to take up men’s spare time, in between smoking the catch, but in the absence of fish it had become men’s central occupation. The fishermen were in no doubt that the advancing construction of the concrete dams upstream of their wooden ones had disrupted the fish’s migrations. Nonetheless the traps’ emptiness implied their failure to channel ancestral power as they built the dam; to secure the alliance of the masters of the fish, the Yakairiti; and to animate their humanoid traps through mental and bodily discipline.

It was two weeks after I had returned to the village, as I was ensconced with the women of my household in preparations for the feasts that would welcome the returning fishermen, that I heard about the solution for the crisis. A man called Dalyamase, who consistently took up the task of ‘solving problems’ related to the foreign world on behalf of his community, called the new village payphone to inform the anxious hosts of the fleets’ imminent return. The women of my household spoke excitedly about how a ‘document had finally emerged’ to liberate the compensation. The document had come down from Brasilia and onto the state capital of Cuiabá, before reaching the local office of the national agency for indigenous affairs, or ‘FUNAI’. The success of this bureaucratic travail was an assurance of men’s mastery of relations with powerful and resource-rich outsiders.

Mobilising such relations to buy farmed fish was an innovation upon an established pattern. The Enawenê had already sought gasoline and nautical oil to power the fleets’ departure to the distant dam sites from the same hydroelectricity consortium whose developments threatened their fishing livelihood. Outboard-powered boats had gradually replaced canoe travel over the previous decade and the fleet had now become too large to be fuelled by maternity and pension benefits. In the context of this constant deficit of fuel and with the consortium’s interest in securing the Enawenê’s agreement to hydroelectricity developments, the enemy also became the readiest source of ‘help for the ritual’. With the radical lack of fish in 2009 foreigners had become, for the first time, both the cause of a new insufficiency in the ritual economy and the source of goods with the potential to supplement and even expand it.

Alongside these resource-mediated frontier relations, cultural politics was in full swing. The delivery of farmed fish to the bridge was filmed by a Brazilian NGO called Video nas Aldeais, who were working on behalf of the government heritage agency to document the Enawenê’s cultural resilience in the face of the damming threat. OPAN had initiated the documentation project hoping that high-level government recognition of the Enawenê’s cultural vitality would bolster their resistance to the dams. Together with the London-based organisation Survival International, OPAN had also arranged for a journalist from The Sunday Times to visit the Enawenê in 2008 in order to write a feature about their assertive opposition. The Enawenê’s spectacular ritual life has also attracted a steady stream of film crews. For example, in 2012 the community allowed the Brazilian media giant Globo to make a documentary about their dam-fishing ritual, Yankwa, for national prime time viewing – again in the hope that this would strengthen their position.

One of the reasons the Enawenê were successful in seeking help for their rituals was that they fitted pervasive ideals of Amerindian identity by virtue of being largely monolingual in their Arawakan dialect, having an active and spectacular ritual life, and taking a warrior stand to protect their territory. In October 2008 they had invaded and burned the construction site of one of the hydroelectric dams, causing significant financial loss to the consortium. The Enawenê’s readiness to go to war to protect their own existential prerogatives posed an ongoing investment risk, both to the consortium and the Brazilian National Development Bank, which was financing the dams. The consortium and the government’s joint commitment to assisting the Enawenê with the resources they needed for their ritual life was an attempt to mitigate that investment risk. Indirectly, it was also connected to the attention the Enawenê received as ‘authentic Indians’ from NGOs, government agencies, and the media, which was conditioned upon their seeking gasoline and fish ‘for their rituals’ – to build monumental wooden dams and feed threatening spirits. Of course as soon as they incorporated these resources, refuelling at the gas station and feasting on farmed fish, they were subject to accusations of culture loss, dependence and avarice – caught in a familiar trap in which the only ‘real Indian’ is a pure other with whom there is no relationship.

It was from online clips of the Globo Reporter documentary that I first discovered that farmed fish had either supplemented or entirely replaced the dams’ catch over the three years subsequent to my leaving the village in July 2009. In 2010 the Enawenê had spent 80,000 reals from their completed 1.5 million compensation payout on fish; in 2011 fish was purchased with new funds provided by the hydroelectricity company; and in 2012 the government heritage agency provided funds for seven tons of fish in order to fulfil its responsibility to safeguard the Enawenê’s ritual life after their dam-fishing ritual, Yankwa, had been inscribed as ‘intangible cultural heritage in need of urgent safeguarding’ both by the Brazilian heritage agency and by UNESCO.¹ The government was offering cultural recognition of the Enawenê’s ritual life and compensating their lost fishing livelihood while denying them meaningful participation in riverine resource developments.

This ethnography of the major ritual in the Enawenê’s annual cycle of festivities, Yankwa, is situated in this fraught context. Nonetheless, its descriptive and analytical scope is not circumscribed by these global phenomena of resource-capture, environmental despoliation, and the transformation of life into heritage. These conditions frame the book just as they conditioned what I could learn about the Enawenê and their ritual life, but they do not define its contents, just as they do not define the totality of Enawenê life.

The construction of wooden dams and the fishermen’s subsequent return to the village, disguised as dangerous spirits and laden with fish and gifts of basketry and beadwork, is the climactic moment of Yankwa’s calendrical ritual process. Throughout the months of Yankwa the Enawenê share their harvests of corn, manioc and fish with one another and with invisible spirit masters, called Yakairiti, in order to assure the continued health and prosperity of their fast-growing population, which was 500 strong in 2009.² Abundant gardens are planted and harvested, wooden dams are constructed to entrap migrating fish; and a predictable, daily sequence of dance, flute music and ancestral song fills the village’s central arena every day, punctuated by periodic events of clowning, feasting and exchanging. This everyday ritual activity is organised on the basis of patrilineal clanship, with two of the nine clans playing a major hosting role during each biennial.

Fishing expeditions organise the temporality of the ritual process, with music and feasting leading up to, and then on from, them. In order to succeed, the dams’ construction must be timed to coincide with the downstream journey of shoal-living fish. The fish go upstream to spawn and feast in the flooded forest when the river level rises during the rains. As the rains slow and the river levels drop, they return to the major rivers. In 2008 and 2009 it was in mid February that the men of seven clans took their leave of the hosts and women in order to journey to five different rivers in the hope of catching and smoking whole shoals of fish. During their absence, the men of the two host clans and all the women of the village are allied in a busy and festive vigil for the fishermen. Men clean the village’s sandy central arena, clear a special port of arrival and ceremonial pathway, and make adornments; while women clean gardens, stock up on manioc flour, distil ash salt, and gather firewood for the dramatic feasts and the months of routine ritualism that follow. Through such preparations the villagers orchestrate the peaceful return of both the fishermen and the predatory spirits with whom they are closely allied.

When the fleets finally dock, the incomers’ fish is exchanged for hosts’ garden foods, drinks and civilised body ornaments over a day and night of spectacular performance. This culminates when the flutes and their animating spirits are restored to their dedicated house at the centre of the village. Over the next two months, the fishermen play the flutes belonging to the two host clans, one after the other, and drink until the harvest from their collective manioc gardens has been exhausted. In order that hosting privileges may circulate among the nine clans, the final phase of the ritual process in June or July involves the preparation of new collective manioc gardens for a new pair of hosts. The harvest from these gardens, which are sited and felled in year one and then further cleared, burned and planted in year two, serve the fishermen and flute players of a subsequent biennial.

Yankwa is not simply the name of a ritual, although it can be used by Enawenê people as such (e.g. ‘soon it will be Yankwa and we will leave for the fishing dams’). It is also a collective noun used in a contextual and relational way to designate ‘the dancers’, ‘the men’, ‘the women’, ‘those who plant manioc’, ‘the flute players’, or ‘the fishermen’. More abstractly ‘Yankwa’ refers to the unity of the separate clans, whose members always play the flutes that belong to others and never their own. Throughout the book I will use ‘Yankwa’ in both the reified sense (‘the ritual’, ‘the season’) and as a collective noun that can mean the flutes, the men, the dancers or the fishermen depending on the context. Although this may be confusing at points for the reader, I do so in order to maintain something of the complex polysemy of this noun, whose every usage implies a linkage between flute, man and spirit on the one hand and, on the other hand, the interdependence between the single clan and the whole community that works, sings and fishes for it.

The word ‘Yankwa’ also evokes a whole series of resonances based on contrasts within an annual cycle of rituals. In relation to these other ritual seasons, Yankwa is thus a particular structure of experience and a collective persona. It generally prevails from at least December through to June, although in 2008 it began in October and extended into July of the following year. Lerohi, another clan-based flute ceremony, follows Yankwa each year, occupying the driest months of July and August. Yankwa and Lerohi are paired, both occupying the season of agriculture, with Yankwa planting manioc and Lerohi planting corn. As such, both are devoted to the Yakairiti, the dangerous subterranean spirits who are masters of riverine and agricultural resources. Whereas both Yankwa and Lerohi play flutes, oppose clans, and are devoted to agriculture, the other pair of rituals, Saluma and Kateoko, oppose men and women, and are devoted to a more mobile economy based on poison fishing, the gathering of honey and other forest foods. Men, as the warrior collective ‘Saluma’, and women, as perfected versions of ancestral womanhood known as ‘Kateoko’, relate not only to each other but also, via their gendered exchanges, to celestial ancestors called Enole-nawe. These are perfect, powerful and mainly – though not unambiguously – benevolent spirits, in sharp contrast to the perverse and predatory Yakairiti.

Each of these seasons and collective personae thus evokes contrasting mythic events and relationships; the sound and melody of a certain kind of vocal or instrumental music; specific economic prerogatives; a particular ceremonial and work routine; certain patterns of dance steps that condition the experience of village space; and a distinctive ceremonial relationship system that determines the circuits through which food and other wealth is distributed. There is also a less tangible mood or ethos that characterises each season. Yankwa is priestly in its gravitas though it has many carnival moments, while during Lerohi, when women dance arm in arm with men to circuit between the village’s houses, the atmosphere is less formal and even a little flirtatious. Similarly, the women of Kateoko are always conscientious about their singing and dance steps and they are punctiliously decorated, whereas in the role of Saluma men are extravagantly flirtatious and disorderly. They charge Kateoko, breaking women’s solemn dance line in order to cover their skirts with honey. On the other hand, in preparation for potentially dangerous political missions, when they have arrows and war clubs rather than honey in hand, Saluma becomes tensely focused on voicing songs evoking ancestral potency.

Further elaborating upon Yankwa’s place in this annual cycle is beyond the scope of this book. Its aim is to seek a holistic understanding of Yankwa as a process that is at once economic, social, cosmological and political: a way of structuring a fisher-agricultural economy, of reconciling antagonistic spirits, of organising social divides of gender and clanship, and seeking recognition from powerful outsiders. This entails moving through activity sequences of monumental dam-building, carefully orchestrated performances, and festive gendered work, and between the different perspectives within Yankwa’s relationship system: that Yankwa’s fishermen, diplomatic emissaries and flute players; that of women, who provision community feasts and are the audience of men’s performances; and that of the humble, servile hosts, who are the ritual’s owners. I focus less on the esoteric and musical dimensions of performance (the content and form of chants, flute music, ceremonial dialogues, and poetic incantations) than on the work involved in sustaining a life of perpetual ritual. This work is always both mundane and extraordinary, practical and cosmogonic, productive and performative.

In the second half of the book, this processual analysis of Yankwa gives way to a series of ethnographically grounded arguments that develop the understanding of Yankwa as a project of vital diplomacy. By this I mean that Yankwa structures relations between different kinds of others – affines, spirits and foreigners – as the condition for political unity, health and material prosperity. Although the Enawenê’s village, manioc gardens, extended family houses and fishing dams are the primary settings for this ethnography, it was in thinking about road blocks mounted at the bridge, and meetings about dam compensation held in urban conference centres, that I began to find a use for this concept of diplomacy. In these contexts Enawenê men encountered people whose interests were fundamentally opposed to their own, with whom they had to engage through the medium of unfamiliar bureaucratic structures, like meetings and document exchange, and with whom they had to communicate in a national language in which no Enawenê person had yet gained fluency in 2009. In other words, like many people living at resource frontiers or ‘zones of friction’ in Tsing’s terms (2005), the Enawenê rapidly had to become sophisticated boundary-crossers. It appeared to me that this was a challenge for which their ritualised social relations and cosmological entanglements prepared them peculiarly well.

The rest of this Introduction is divided into four parts. I begin by making the connection between this book’s two key concepts, ritual and diplomacy, in order to detail how the Enawenê’s intensely ritualised life implies a diplomatic orientation in the cosmos, in social interaction and in political agency. Secondly, I situate the diplomatic orientation of the Enawenê within an Amazonian comparative horizon, presaging some of the lines of contrast among Amazonian peoples that I will return to throughout the book. I then present an account of Yankwa’s endurance and transformation through a violent colonial history in order to demonstrate Yankwa’s capacity to reconstitute prosperity, health and peace through the vicissitudes of history. Finally I reflect on the fieldwork on which this book is based. It was undertaken at a historical juncture when the Enawenê were beginning to think of anthropological research as necessarily exploitative and disempowering – very much like research conducted for hydropower viability studies. This gave my ethnographic research a politicised and highly gendered character in ways that condition the kind of ethnography I have written.

Ritual and Diplomacy

It may be jarring to hear the concept of diplomacy applied to an Amerindian population of just a few hundred, not least because in dominant popular and anthropological constructions of Amazonian societies they are represented as non-centralised or anti-state, hostile to the cementation of sovereignty, dominated by a factional politics, and cosmologically oriented to warfare and the capture of alterity.³ But it was an essay by Claude Lévi-Strauss (1949), based on his fieldwork with the Enawenê’s neighbours, the Nambikwara, during the Second World War, that prompted me to consider the Enawenê’s practical diplomatic skills, honed through ritual practice, together with their interactions with those they call iñoti – a term I translate as ‘foreigners’ after Lévi-Strauss.⁴ The Nambikwara reserved aggression of an artful and highly controlled kind for people with whom they sought alliance, whereas they avoided and fled from those considered beyond the ken of common humanity. There was a useful tension between aggression and cooperation in Nambikwara political life, which exercised and dissolved antagonisms. Lévi-Strauss contrasted this to the European morality in which there was a stark disjuncture between an impossible ideal of total peace, and a peril of total war (ibid.: 152).

In particular he was thinking of the marked, organised and stylised expression of aggression in gift exchange, marriage alliance, ceremonial dialogue and chiefly oratory, all of which were in evidence when Nambikwara bands met in the savannah (Lévi-Strauss 1949: 150). He argued that these ritual forms should be understood as the equivalents of European foreign affairs, because they were elaborate technologies for negotiating relative status and brokering peace. This points to collective, institutionalised and conventional ways for dealing with shifting and contested boundaries between a society and its outside, in a space that falls between common citizenship and total enmity.⁵

I suggest that anthropological theorisations of ritual may help us to approach diplomacy more rigorously