ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL STRUCTURE OF THE SELK'NAM SOCIETY

The use of certain concepts from the works of Karl Marx and Karl Polanyi hopefully clarifies a number of characteristics of this economy which otherwise might not be evident and it should also facilitate the comparison of this society with others and avoid treating those of hunters and gatherers as one type among many pre-capitalistic societies , or isolating them in a niche as a band or egalitarian society.

At the end of the 19th century the Selk'nam (Onas) and the Haush, the hunting-gathering people who inhabited the Isla Grande, Tierra del Fuego (Argentina and Chile) were decimated by the Whites, either killed outright died of diseases brought, though unintentionally, by the Whites. Of a population that Gusinde (1982 I: 135) calculated as comprising from 3,500 to 4,000 individuals, there exist today (2004) on the Isla Grande very few descendants of the Selk’nam. Since the death of Lola Kiepja, on 9 October 1966, to the present (15 December 2004) the thirteen people of Selk'nam descent I had the honour of working with through the years or simply knew, have also died among them, Estaban and his sister Rafaela Ishton, Angela Loij, "Pancho" Minkiol, Federico Echeuline, Luis Garibaldi Honte, Segundo Arteaga, and Enriqueta Varela de Santin. There are, however, a number of others who live on the island, whose parents or grandparents were Indian or Mestizos, who hope to keep at least part of the Selk’nam tradition alive.

The Selk'nam and Haush of the Isla Grande occupy a privileged place in the anthropological literature partly because, as far as is known, they had an uninterrupted past as hunter-gatherers, going back thousands of years, ever since they arrived there from the north. Isolated on the island, through the centuries they had very little if any contact with Indian farmers further north. Therefore their cultures, up until about 1880, were "pristine", virtually unaffected by contact with cultivators. In contrast, many of the other hunter-gatherers, tribes and communities in Paraguay, Brazil and Bolivia, had been (or still are) part-time cultivators. They were forced out of their territory as a result of European conquests, or by more aggressive Indian neighbours, and had taken refuge in areas which were unfit for intensive cultivation and therefore they had to depend principally or exclusively on hunting and gathering to survive. The "patagonians", Tehuelches, were traditional hunters, like the Selk’nam, but by the late seventeen century the Mapuches (Araucanians ) acquired horses from the Spaniards and tamed wild horses. Once they could ride horse-back they invaded and colonized a great part of Patagonia, settled there and intermarried with the Tehuelches. The horses and the Mapuches, who were cultivators and part-time hunters-gatherers, radically transformed the Tehuelche traditional way of life.

The Selk'nam had had only sporadic contact with the Whites until about1880 when the colonization of their island began. Therefore the memory and even the experiences of those who survived the colonization reverted back to the period when their culture was still intact. Lola Kiepja was the last person who lived as a Selk'nam (until her youth). By the late nineteenth century there were far less Haush than Selk'nam. Though an unknown number had been killed or poisoned by sealers and succumbed to diseases during the course of the nineteenth century, this may not explain the great difference in population. Apparently the Haush were a peaceful people and they may have lost a considerable portion of their population, before the Europeans arrived, during conflicts with the more aggressive Selk’nam who had "pushed" them into the south-eastern section of the island. They were living there in 1619 when they were first visited by Europeans, the Nodal brothers, in Good Success Bay, along the Strait of Le Maire, in two caravels sent by the king of Spain to explore the new route to the Pacific, via Cape Horn, recently discovered by the Dutch three years previously.

Still another factor distinguishes the Selk'nam and Haush from other hunting-gathering groups of Brazil and nearby countries. Their habitat, though situated in the extreme southern regions of the hemisphere, was not a marginal area of poor resources, rather to the contrary, it was favourable for this type of economy but not for agriculture. Hunters and gatherers had "survived" on the island some eleven thousand years (Massone, 1983, 1987). The archaeologists have insisted that the area south of the Magellan Strait, which includes the Isla Grande, was not a refuge area in the sense that the climate was not overbearing and fauna was adequate for this type of subsistence, nor did the environment curtail or limit the cultural expressions of its inhabitants.

The economy and social organization of the Selk'nam and that of the Haush were similar, at least during their last period, so for the purpose of this article they are treated as one socitey. For the reasons cited above this society affords insight into the hunting-gathering mode of life in its plenitude, fertilized, so to speak, by many thousands years of experiences, until it was destroyed at the end of the nineteenth century.

The Selk'nam and Haush were semi-nomads in the sense that the local groups (lineages or extended families) of which there were approximately eighty (in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries), moved from one camp site to another within the limits of their respective territories, called haruwin. They were not navigators. They did not have any type of sea-craft. This raises the question of how they crossed the Strait of Magellan (which is four kilometers wide in its narrowest part). Were they simply given a ride by the Alakaluf Indians who were navigators? Did they fabricate rafts from tree trunks, crowding their families on top with dogs and all? It is not yet known just how or when the Selk'nam arrived on the Isla Grande, though it is known the Haush preceded them ( L. Bridges 1952:443; Gusinde 1982 I: 120). Other hunters, who "disappeared" (became extinct) or were assimilated by the "new comers", had probably inhabited the island thousand of years before. Borrero (l997: 62) points out that for the period between 9,000 and 2,500 BP (Before Present) there is still a "paucity" of archeological data in northern Tierra del Fuego. But there is reliable evidence that hunters crossed the Strait of Magellan some eleven thousand years ago (Massone 1987: Borrero and McEwan: 1997: 42,45 ). Apparently at that period there was still a land bridge at the Second Narrows formed by glacial moraines. The bridge was covered over afterwards, probably by the melting glaciers. The late-comers (especially the Selk’nam) had no natural bridge upon which to cross the Magellan Strait, so they either "hitched" canoe rides with the local Alakaluf, who were expert canoers, or they made some kind of raft.

The Isla Grande, divided between Argentina and Chile since 1881, though it was claimed before, is situated between the approximate latitudes 52º and 55º South. Of its entire area of approximately 48,000 square kilometres, about 38,000 sq.km was occupied by the Indians, at least during the nineteenth century. The remaining 10,000 sq. km correspond to the Darwin Cordillera on the south-western rim of the island. In the city of Ushuaia, on Beagle Channel, the winter temperatures vary from 12º to 27º centigrade below zero, while the summer average is 10º above zero. In the steppe or prairie land of the northern part of the island (facing the Atlantic Ocean and the Strait of Magellan), the temperatures vary between 20º below zero in the winter to 27º above zero in the summer. Along this northern coast the winter temperature tends to be almost two degrees warmer than along the southern coast (mainly Beagle Channel). The summer days (December to March) are notably long, with a maxim of light from 4 a.m. to past mid-night. Summer is the season of the strongest Antarctic winds and sometimes it snows during the summer in the southern parts of the island. In the winter ( June to September)it is light during shortest days only from about 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. The short day-light is compensated for by calmer winds and transparent clarity. Gallardo (1910:85) pointed out that the climate in Tierra del Fuego was not "as bad" as might be expected given its geographic location, that it was healthy climate, devoid of endemic sicknesses where humans were able to live without being mordified by extreme temperatures. He particularly commented on the excellent health and vigour of the children.

Their principal prey was the guanaco (Lama guanicoe). Other animals were important: the Fuegian fox (Dusicyon culpaeus lycoides) for its fur, rodents, especially the tucutucu (Ctenomys magellanicus fueguinus) also for their fur as well as their meat and certain birds of which there are some two hundred species on the island.

I will only mention a few favourites: geese, ducks, cormorants and penguins. To vary their diet bird eggs were consumed. Feathers of certain species were used on the arrow shafts, head-dresses and bracelets while the femurs were suitable for awls . One of the last Mestizos told me, perhaps as a joke, that he had heard that when there was a real scarcity of food during the winter, the men would sometimes bleed their noses on to the snow in order to attract sea-gulls and trap them.

There is not doubt that the guanaco was the preferred game, the one most sought after for clothing and their shelters (see below). It was by far the most favoured food. The word for guanaco meat was jepr which also signified food. It was considered the real food. Gallardo {1910: 168-69) commented on the importance of meat in their diet.

The Indian does not use salt, about which he is completely ignorant nor did he use any kind seasoning. As meat is his principal food he does not feel the necessity for salt, but when he is obliged to eat vegetables for several days at a time, he does not feel satisfied, he feels that something is lacking, which can only be the minerals which are rare in vegetables but more abundant in meat.

Gusinde observed (1982 I: 279), "They never tire of guanaco meat, probably because it is consumed in pieces which are freshly roasted and juicy." An adult guanaco proportioned more than a hundred kilos of meat and bones ( L. Bridges 1952: 26l). But, according to Gusinde again (1982: I: 277) for a family a six, a large guanaco lasted only four or five days. They drank its blood soon after it was killed or made it into a sort of sausage with the intestine. They especially liked the bone marrow. Virtually nothing was wasted. The fat that remained was mixed with the clays that were employed for body paints, and cut into small pieces it served as a pacifier for the babies (Gusinde 1982 I: 357). The skins were used for the wind-breakers or to cover the conical huts (wigwams), made of tree trunks and branches. Guanaco skin was very suitable for clothing; the large capes worn by both sexes, the women's skirts and pubic covers, the men's headdress, sandals and leggings as well as bed covers and even the balls for their games. Except during certain ceremonies, the capes were worn with the fur outside, thus providing maximum protection from the rain and snow. The rather large bags for transporting water and other objects was also made of guanaco hide while the bladder was suitable for the smaller bags. The tendons and nerves were cut into strips, woven into ropes and thread. The latter was the thread with which the women sewed pieces of skin together for the clothes and large covers. The tendons and nerves also served as bow strings, bird traps or snares, fishing nets, necklaces, which the women decorated with tiny shells and small bones, as well as bracelets, anklets, the head bands and ropes to tie the cradles on the back of the women. The guanaco’s lower leg bones are very hard, and especially apt for making awls and harpoon points, while young girls used the tails as hair for their dolls, parted in the middle (for an illustration of a doll see Gusinde 1982 I: 374).

The tucutuco rodent had been an important and abundant prey or game for the Selk'nam in the northern part of the island before 1880 when Europeans (from Punta Arenas) began taking over the area for raising sheep. The terrain being rather flat and lacking forests was called parik (pampa). Guanacos were far more numerous there before colonization. The newly arrived estancia owners and their employees killed them as pests (for competing with their sheep) and as food for their dogs. During the summer of 1873-74, one of the early explorations (Pertuiset 1877: l65-205), of Frenchmen in this case, two small groups of Selk'nam were seen wearing guanaco capes. The explorers hunted guanacos at least four times during the month they were in the area (from Gente Grande to Usless Bay on the north-western coast of the island). However, by the mid eighties, as the land was being rapdily fenced in for sheep farms, many herds had fled to the forests. The guanacos were unmolested by farm employees and their dogs beyond the Rio Grande river, the more forested region called hersk,

Pertuiset also refers to the rodents (probably tucutucos) which the "Fuegians" (Selk’nam) hunted and to their innumerable tunnels or burrows that made horseback riding perilous. Though the meat of these little rodents was tasty, a great quantity of their skins and much sewing was required to make a cape or covering of their hide. They were not only small, their fur was very fine, not as warm as that of the guanaco. When there were no guanacos or tucutucos to be had, a fox might take their place though the Selk'nam were repelled by the idea of eating it mainly because it didn’t respect the human cadavers that hadn’t been buried deeply enough, and its flesh had a bad odour. Even so, in an emergency it did make a meal after its meat had been cooked in ashes for a very long time (Gallardo 1910: 2l). However, the fox was appreciated for its fur because it was softer and warmer than that of the guanaco. Then too, fox hide was preferred for the men's hand bags that were also used to cover or to protect the genitals when the men were not wearing the cape. Like the fox, seals were also a complement or substitute for the guanaco and were sought by the Haush where there were many more herds or pods in the south-eastern extremity of the island than in Selk’nam territory.

The southern sea lion (Otaria byronia ), the southern fur seal (Actocephalus australis) and the elephant seal (Mirounga leonina) were more abundant in the Haush territory than in the Selk’nam area, at least since the seventeenth century. Seal fur and skin, especially of the first two mentioned, were used for clothing and hut covers. The Selk’nam also preferred it for the quiver, probably because it was thicker than guanaco skin. Seal bladder was made into small bags, its fat mixed with the paint substance (usually clay) and certain bones made into harpoons and projectile points. Lola didn’t like seal meat probably because, like many Selk’nam, she was unaccustomed to it, even that of the pups that was always preferred to that of the adults by the Haush and by the European commercial sealers.

Whale meat and blubber were highly esteemed. When a large whale had been beached, Gallardo (1910: 241) affirmed that a group might remain a year on the site. However it is very unlikely that they could feed on the whale for so long even if some of its meat and blubber had been preserved in the salt-water. The baleen of the sperm whale was made into cords of various sizes, especially for the bird traps. According to Natalie Goodall (1976: 45) thirteen baleen whales were beached, as late as 1965 and during just one week. This occurred in former Yahgan territory on a shore near her Harberton farm, along Beagle Channel.

Besides eggs, the women gathered certain plants, mussels and fish trapped in ponds during low tide, firewood, clays and limestone and clays for paints. Gusinde (1982: I: 268-70) may have underestimated the importance of plants as food when he wrote:

The women's contribution to food for the family is so limited in quantity and irregular that it can not be relied upon...the exploitation of plants is so seldom and precarious that it plays little or no part in the domestic economy...the few plants they do consume only serve to stimulate and vary their diet.

Martinez-Crovetto (1968, 1978) noted that only forty of the 179 plants he listed, were consumed by the Selk'nam, however his study is not conclusive. Berries and a variety of mushrooms were great favourites. Celery or chicory, certain roots and the sap of trees were appreciated. The children were delighted when they were offered a paste, made from the seeds of a plant (Descurainia antartica) called tay, said to taste like chocolate. The seeds were ground with an oblong-shaped stone on a rather large flat stone, then toasted and mixed with animal fat. These stones were left in the camp-site near the plant, to be used again the following season. This was most prevalent in the northern part of the island. Plants became essential when meat and fish were scarce. Angela Loij told me that before the arrival of the Whites, when people were starving, some survived on seaweed (Chapman 1977).

Crabs, and crustaceans , especially mussels and, clams, though found along certain coasts of the Selk'nam and Haush areas, were much more abundant further south, in Yamana territory. The Selk'nam used the large volute shells to drink water which was only found along the San Sebastian Bay, on the north coast, and was an important item of barter throughout the island.

Fish were usually available to vary the diet. Besides picking up fish trapped on the beach at low tide , or stabbing them with small lances, the Selk’nam fished rather large quantities with snares at the outlets of rivers. The snares or nets were carefully made from baleen of whales, guanaco nerves or seal sinew. The fish often mentioned were sea bass, hake, conger eel, pejerrey (a variety of mackerel), sardines and trout.

The Selk’nam (and the Yahgans) dried fish and mushrooms. The Selk’nam kept the latter in small bags as they did the paste of the "chocolate" seeds. Hermetically sealed guanaco and seal meat and whale blubber buried in salt water lagoons, bogs or mud ponds remained edible for about a month. I was told that they sometimes left preserved meat or fat in a camp-site to have it on hand as soon as they returned there. The women carried some food among their domestic belongings, when they hiked from one camp-site to another. But more important than the conservation was, as Gusinde remarked (1982 I: 277-78), "Spontaneous mutual help liberates them from worrying about the future and about conserving any special quantity of food." This is important to recall as it emphasises their mutual-help ideology. Apparently the Selk’nam had strong communal awareness that guaranteed that no one or group would suffer, much less die, from hunger or any other calamity, if help from their "comrades" could alleviate or save them.

Gathering fire-wood did not present special problems given the prevalence of forests (of three species of Nothofagus beech trees) in the hersk (forest) section of the island, and the prevalence of dried or rotten wood. A variety of large bushes grew almost everywhere, even in the northern pampa teraine. Silex, flint, quartz, and volcanic stones appropriate for the tools and weapons were found in certain parts of the island. This is also true for the clays, essential for the manufacture of the body paints.

The two "modes" utilized here (appropriation and production), based principally on the work of Karl Marx, are employed because, as noted above, they reveal characteristics of the economy that the ethnographic description might possibly ignore.

Obviously the term "production" is not applicable to the work involved in hunting, gathering and fishing because the only transformation which takes place on the objects is that of suppressing their lives. Marx (1983: I, 133-34) refers to mining, hunting, fishing, etc. as "extractive industries", contrasts them with all other types of industries. He clarified that the objects acquired by these extractive industries are given by nature, and distinguished from those which are "already infiltrated by previous work."

The transportation of such material is also included here a part of the "mode" of appropriation. I refer to those which were hunted or gathered and taken to the camp-site as well as the heavy loads of domestic utilities which the women carried during the often long marches through the forests and over bogs, in rain or snow. The men would take over the loads if the women were pregnant, or to aliviate them on the long hikes. In dire circumstances a man would carry his wife (or some other kin) on his back and pass her load to someone else (Gusinde 1982: I 453).

A mode of appropriation in any society is necessarily articulated with a mode of production. Both are equally important. These two modes are meant to include every type of work which contributes to supplying the material means of existence.

In the Selk'nam society hunting and gathering are the most vital. The latter, in its broadest sense, includes firewood and natural resources necessary for manufacture, for production, as well as that of food and water. Though fishing was not essential in normal times, it became so in periods of hunger or threats of famine.

These two modes (appropriation and production) may be analyzed as composed of two factors: the work process and the social relations involved in each (Marx 1983 I: 26l; Godelier 198l: 15; Hindess and Hirst 1975: 10).

According to Marks (1983 I: 131, "The simple factors which intervene in process of work are : the activity adequate for an end, that is the [a] work itself,[b] its object and [c] its means."

[a] The work itself (or labour) employed during appropriation of objects consisted of locating, killing or gathering them and, usually, transporting them to the locality of redistribution, consumption or production.

[b] The object given by nature lacks "value" (as defined by Marx see below). Here we refer to the fauna, flora, minerals or stones, clays (for paints) and water.

[c] Obviously the principal means or instruments of this sort of work were the tools: bows and arrows of different sizes for hunting the prey such as the guanaco, the fox and certain birds, a pointed stick for killing rodents, clubs also for the latter, seals, and very young guanacos, traps and snares for birds, etc. Gathering at times was done without tools, though often a pointed stick or a stone knife was needed to uproot and cut the plants or loosen mussels from the rocks, and stone axes to cut branches and fell trees. To unearth the rodents a stick about a meter long toped by a piece of leather to protect the hand was used. Fishing was done with a lance, a harpoon, or a net as well as by hand. Bags, baskets and ropes were employed to transport the objects to the camp-site and some, such as dead animals, were simply carried on the hunter’s back.

The dog was also an auxiliary for the hunt of guanacos and to retrieve dead or wounded birds. However it was usually only semi-domesticated and may not always have been very useful. Some dogs were probably semi-wild strays who hung around the camp- sites hoping for a meal. The female dog reproduced without any "outside" help and all or most could find food on their own, though they preferred to be fed, eat leftovers or residues. Apparently the dog was not an object of barter though it did "contain" a variable amount of labour, depending on the amount of training it received. Upon the death of its owner, usually a man, all of his personal property was burned or buried with him (see below) except his dog which was inherited by his kin, especially one that had proven to be useful in the hunt. Everyone knew who was the owner of such a "pet" and if it misbehaved the "victim" refrained from scolding or beating it (Gusinde 1982 I: 408, 415). The most esteemed dogs were given personal names. They were also used as heaters, so to speak. On a cold night they were a welcome sleeping companions and were often guardians. Probably the puppies were treated as pets by the children, though the adult dogs were usually not, despite the bed-warming.

Social relation are established through [a] the work involved and [b] the land or place where the objects are appropriated.

[a] The Work. We do not assume a that the sexual division of is a "natural condition" as Marx does ( l983: I, 43, 286) and many contemporary authors, but rather that all the varieties of the social division of labour among human beings are culturally, not biologically, determined (Durkheim 1960: 24; Sahlins, 1964) except, importantly, for the mothers’ care of babies and young children which is probably biologically determined, to a great extent.

The Hunt. Only men were taught from early childhood to developed the necessary intellectual, physical, psychic aptitudes necessary for the hunt: to learn the habits of the game, to resist fatigue and adverse weather, to build a shelter, lit a fire almost anyplace, and above all to manipulate effectively the bow and arrow and to handle the dogs if need be. The hunt was not only an absolute necessity, it was a real passion of the men (Gallardo 1910: 182). Women could kill young guanacos, with a club and with the aid of dogs. This they did in an emergency when, for example, the men in their group were incapacitated. It was relatively easy for the men to kill seals with clubs, especially the baby seals which were preferred, though they had to be wary of an enraged mother seal, or a male determined to defend himself and his harem. The rodents were killed by almost anyone, irrespective of their sex or age (of course excepting young children) especially in the steppe , parik, the northwest section of the island. This game was passive, not very mobile, easy to locate and could be killed by striking its tunnel with a stick or club and beating the animal to death as it attempted to escape. These hunting parties often consisted of several women, accompanied by their children, an entire family or the men alone. On the other hand, the specialized hunting of birds was the men's task when it was done with snares, which the women were not trained to handle. Cormorant hunting, also done exclusively by the men, was extremely laborious and dangerous when the cormorants were sought-out in their nests, in the walls of precipices and high cliffs. Women did take part in hunting lagoon birds. They confused or dazed them at night by the light of burning torches which they waved in front of them while the men entered the water and killed them with clubs or lances. Gusinde (1982 I: 266) commented, "The Indian shows great audacity, and even greater ingenuity and skill when hunting birds."

The season of the year also determined the social forms of labour for the hunt. For example , during winter it was easier to hunt guanacos (than in the summer). Though they were thinner then, their hoof-prints could be detected in the snow, when they descended from the hills and mountain tops to seek pasture in the valleys where they were more accessible to the hunters. During this season men from a territory (a haruwin) went hunting together more often than during the other seasons. (Gusinde 1982 I:12-14: L.Bridges 1952: 253). In the winter, the men alone hunted marine animals In northern section of the island. Summer was the preferred season to hunt rodents, because of their abundance (Gusinde 1982 I: 259).

Gathering. Women, often accompanied by children, were in charge of systematic gathering of almost all the objects necessary for domestic consumption. They collected edibles, as mentioned above, water and often the firewood. The tools required for such tasks were a pointed stick, or a knife, a basket, a bag and straps or cords to transport the objects back to their dwellings. Gusinde noted (1982 I: 268): "There is a total lack of special utensils for this task." The men sometimes gathered such food (Gallardo 1910: 25: Gusinde 1982 I: 410), and especially firewood. However there appear to have been a certain reluctance on the part of the men to take over the women's tasks. Gusinde commented: "If an Indian happened upon a nest containing eggs, he might pick them up but more likely he would point out the nest to the his wife or daughter , who would then go there." He further asserted that the men never gathered "edible products"(1982 I: 269, 328). But the men did gather other materials, besides firewood, such the appropriate woods and the minerals (stones) for the manufacture of tools, to lit a fire (flint and pyrite) and tree trunks, used in the construction of the wigwam type dwelling and the ceremonial hut, which required the use of a stone axe or fire.

The social aspect is also outstanding. The women seldom worked alone, usually two or more women cooperated doing identical tasks. While the men were more solitary workers and when they did cooperated, the individuals were often assigned different tasks to achieved an agreed upon objective, as when they hunted guanacos and cormorants.

Fishing. It was performed in the same way as the hunting and gathering: the less specialized work was assigned to the women. They usually fished along the coast with a small lance or picked up recently dead fish at low tide, activity which was often combined with collecting shellfish. If for example the male provider had no adult sons or near male kin, became ill or was deceased, the wife or widow and older daughters turned to fishing, as a substitute for guanaco meat, to consume with the foods gathered. As the division of labour was not a law, the men gathered fish or used a lance. But their specialty involved rather large nets or building small dikes, usually at the mouth of a river. While one or more would manipulate or steady the net, or take care that dike held together, others would kill the fish. Gusinde (l982 I: 269) remarked that small amounts of fish were consumed.

For the work involving appropriation from nature it may be said that the men performed the more specialized tasks and that which required the coordination of several or more workers doing different tasks. The women's work was more social but less specialized, and when they worked together, they performed the same tasks (Chapman 1966-81, 1977: Gallardo 1910: 185).

[b] The land. The land (and the water) provided all the elements (the objects) that were appropriated. The land was held in common by the lineages and regulated by the patrilineal and patrilocal rules, which again were not laws, as sometimes a man might take advantage of his mother's lineage, but rarely if ever, was a woman granted the right to inherit the land (see below). Recall that the mother's lineage was also patrilineal and patrilocal. The inheritance of land could be violated by combats between or among different lineages (the "owners" of the territories, the haruwins). Also the ownership of land was limited by custom: neighbours could have access to it, if they had made the necessary request by sending a messenger, or a fire signal, to the proprietors of the territory they wanted to enter. The lineage or family which agreed to allow such incursions usually received some compensation, a portion of the game killed on their territory or gifts of arrows (Chapman 1966-81, 1977: Gusinde 1982 I: 405).The limits of the lineage or extended family territories were well known and jealously guarded. A man who found himself and his kin in great need to enter that of a unfriendly or enemy neighbour took the chance of being detected and of suffering the consequences of an attack ( ibid. Chapman and Gusinde 1982 II: 716).

It may seem strange that a group that depended on a wide roaming game, the guanaco, that could not be claimed by any faction of the society, were so strict concerning the lineage rights over their territorial boundaries. Despite the great attention paid to boundaries, the proprietors may usually have allowed neighbours to trespassed their territories when pursuing the guanaco within their territory so long as they received some compensation if the game was killed, as mentioned above. The neighbours could be confident that the owners of the haruwin they "invaded" while on the hunt (unless they were declared enemies) would at only request a modest part of the game they had killed.

The land was valued to heighten the prestige of the lineage, the more land the greater the prestige, as for example that of Lola’s material grandfather, Alaken, mentioned in the article The End of a World. Certainly a given territory at a given time was valued for the guanaco herds which happened to be there as well as for its stationary products among them the akel clay (essential for making the favourite red paint) certain birds who habitually nested there, different types of stones used to make tools, pyrite for fire, the best wood for bows and arrows, etc.

So again to what extent was land ownership of the lineage, the haruwin, important or enforced? Angela's comment may give a clue to respond to this question. While telling me about a certain man, named Noshitin, whose territory, haruwin, called Kulwin, included what became the town of Río Grande, she said:

Noshitin was not fussy about people [other Selk'nam] coming [into his territory] to take akel [the much valued red ochre used as body paint]. He said: "It's better that they take that up there [on the far limits of his territory] so I can keep what is here closer by." When he saw a fire signal [that someone was digging for the red ochre] , he did not get mad. Noshitin was not fussy but Kilhun [a Selk'nam of another territory] did get mad when others came looking for eggs in his haruwin

Angela's comment reveals that the owners of the territories varied in their reaction to the "invasion" by their neighbours, while some were not fussy (delicado in Spanish) others would get angry and might well oppose such incursions or demand compensation for the products appropriated or even attempt to monopolize their raw material and barter it to the best of his advantage. A different reaction to such "invasions" was given by Federico who told of families in a territory called Hamker, in the north area of the island, where certain type of sandstone was found, that served to make the arrow staff straightners, also named hamker. The people there were careful not to reveal the precise location of the stone and he added: "Only those people got it." They bartered the stone or the tool, for other items (see below).

However the lineage territory was not a free for all the members of the lineage, some individual, personal, rights prevailed. Gusinde noted that the man who found a subterranean tunnel of a tucutuco (and other such rodents) and lacked time to kill it, would designate the tunnel by placing a stick in the ground over it, to assert his property right to it. At times, this same procedure was practiced for nests that later would be full of eggs (Gusinde 1982 I: 411).

An exception to lineage property rights was the beached whale. No one could claim ownership to it. The first person to sight it, almost invariably someone from the lineage territory where it had been beached, was obliged by custom to notify its presence by fire signals and allow anyone and everyone to come into his territory and partake of this "gift of nature." Also a whale offered far too much meat and blubber to be consumed or preserved by a single family or lineage before it rotted. Even without a fire signal, the neighbours would soon become aware of a dead whale on the shore by the large flocks of sea-birds which swarmed over it and when it began to decompose, by it strong stench.

As there was no public centre, such as a village or town, the entire Selk'nam community had the customary right to hold its public meetings in all the territories. Outstanding meetings attracted people from near and far. The lineages relinquished their exclusive territorial rights for the Hain ceremony (which moved from one place to another when the food supply began to dwindle), for the Kuash-ketin meeting for gift exchange and barter ( see below) , for the shamanistic seances, for sporting events and for mourning rituals of "famous people".

As noted above, the lineage possessed the land, the haruwins, here translated as territories. Apparently all the inhabitable land on the island was claimed by one or another lineage, both Selk'nam and Haush, with the exception of the cordilleras and that occupied by the neighbouring Yamana, along the coast of Beagle Channel, and strips of the coast on the western section , along Useless Bay, and Admiralty Sound partially claimed by the Alakaluf (Kaweskar). So far some eighty territories have been identified, including the thirty-nine noted by Gusinde, with reference to the last period, as of about 1880. The remainder were documented mainly thanks to Angela and Federico. And there well may have been more, especially in the Haush region and in the area of Lago Blanco (western region, near Useless Bay) that were not very familiar to my informants.

The limits of the territories were well known, as I mentioned above, even by people who did not live in the vicinity. As far as I could discover there were no man-made boundary indicators. The Selk'nam used their gift of memory to name virtually all notable geographic features of the island; capes, cliffs, stretches of coast, bays, rivers (which had several names along their different sections) lakes, lagoons, mountains, hills of all sizes, valleys, flat and bog lands, even clusters of trees and large rocks (See Gusinde 1982 I:397). These were cited when describing the limits of the territories. Angela gave me the names of over 600 such features and certainly the former Selk'nam, and probably she, knew many more.

Gusinde made clear (1982 II: 716) that their keen sense of property rights (of the lineage, not of the individual) had heighten their indignation when confronted with outsiders (the Whites) who took over their land. Gallardo (1910: 252) also noted:

Why wouldn't he [ the Selk'nam] not be annoyed when the Whiteman deprived him of his land, killed his guanaco and replaced it with sheep and cattle for his exclusive use? The savage did not comprehend that with the pretext and support of civilization that he be stripped of his land so he paid [ the invader] with the same money, he robbed the sheep to feed his children.

Garibaldi commented in the film I made with Ana Montes ("The Ona People: Life and Death in Tierra del Fuego" ) that, "for them [the Selk'nam] the guanaco had no owner, so they thought that the rest of the animals [ the sheep] had no owner either. So they'd take animals to eat, not to make money with them."

Here a brief summary will be made of the manufacture or production of goods: tools, weapons, domestic ware, ornaments, clothing, items that were quickly consumed such as prepared food and body paints, and so forth.

1.) The material employed in production are of two types: the natural resources obtained through appropriation (fauna, flora and minerals or stones) and that which was produced: fire. The latter required flint and pyrite which were shared within the lineage and were objects of barter

2.) The character of the labour applied to the production of goods is not entirely identical to that which is sometimes applied to the appropriation of natural resources. A single person (or several doing an identical task) in a unilineal succession of operations usually perform this labour. One person may initiate a task and another terminate it, but the process is almost always unilineal. This implies that there is no coordinated specialization (people doing different tasks to achieve a unique goal, a finished product). This character of the production contrasts with the labour sometimes executed during appropriation: of communal hunting mentioned above (of guanacos, cormorants, lagoon birds and fishing with nets) when several or more men were assigned to different tasks, sometimes

3.) The means of labour were the tools, which may be considered as comprising two types. The first are those given in nature that do not "contain" human labour (except that of obtaining or gathering it) such as unworked stones used as hammers or as mortars to grind seeds, (the pestles were sometimes slightly reworked), small trunks or large branches used as clubs to kill young guanacos and seals and so forth. The second type were of course the manufactured tools or weapons (knives, scrapers, choppers, chisels, arrow shaft straightners, bows, arrows, other projectile points, lances, nets, baskets, etc.)

Most of the tools were multi-functional with some exceptions such as bird traps and snares, fish nets and special straps used by the women to secure the loads they carried from one camping ground to another. Even the bow had a use besides that of the hunt, though non-productive, as part of the structure of an outstanding "spirit" of the Hain ceremony, called Xalpen. However different sizes of bows and arrows were specialized for the hunt; those for guanaco or foxes, and others for different birds. Because of these uses, and the necessity to achieve mastery of them, archery was practiced in sporting competitions and the youths were trained, mainly during the prolonged Hain ceremony. The arrowhead, though carefully made, was said, by Gallardo (l910: 275) and Lothrop (1928:77) to only require fifteen minutes to manufacture. This is misleading because the short span of time does not consider the amount of training necessary to achieve such rapidity. The simpler the tool, the greater was its gamut of utility, such as hammers, scrapers, and knives.

Social relations of production

This subject lends itself to be described in terms of two categories: labour and tools.

1.) Labour. As already mentioned, the men's productive work (as distinguished from appropriation work) was usually performed individually. In contrast, women's work of the same nature was more often carried out in a group, usually kin, with the exception of weaving baskets and curing skins. Note that women produced much if not most of the consumer's goods: preparation of food, manufacture of clothing, bed and shelter covers, the water bags, and so forth. The mother of a newly born infant made her baby's cradle. Gusinde (l982 I: 233-34, 330) clarified that the straps, used and manufactured by the women to secure their burdens, were from twenty to thirty meters long and made from the skin or hide of old guanacos. The feminine labour was often tedious and time consuming as for instance that involved in the manufacture of capes of the skins of the tucutuco rodents in the northern (parik) section of the island. A hundred or more skins could be necessary to make just one cape. This may seem surprising or exaggerated. In 1886 the gold prospector, Julio Popper (1887: 83-84), and his men frightened of small group of Selk'nam in this section of the island, who fled in terror, leaving behind their bundles which upon examination were found to contain 400 dead tucutucos, each carefully wrapped in straw and branches of bushes. This quantity could not possibly have been eaten before they rotted so a great many of them were certainly used to make capes.

As pointed out above, most of the raw materials used by the women in their productive work, excepting the tucutucos which the women also hunted, were obtained from the men. Animal skins were the most common: guanaco hides predominately, though skins of rodents, the fox (mainly for clothing) and the seals were also important. The men likewise manufactured the instruments or tools the women employed, mainly the scrapers used for curing the skins, awls for sewing, knives for cutting, etc. She however usually gathered the reeds to manufacture baskets and may have made the small pointed stick she employed to weave them. This factor undoubtedly accentuated the sexual division of labour in favour of an economic dependence of the women with respect to the men.

The woman's labour was of vital importance, certainly on a par with that of the men. However, as just noted, the relations of production were such that she depended on the men's labour for most of the raw material (the skins and meat) and the tools she needed. Another factor increased this dependence. Her work was less specialized than the man's. If necessary he could take over her work (all except her "reproductive work", giving birth) while she could not effectively or routinely perform his productive work. Individuals of both sexes were honoured as artisans of one type and another. Certain women achieved recognition as expert basket weavers or "tailors", which the men never, or very rarely, achieved. (see below under Status). Although the men could do most of the women's work they probably could not do it with a comparable "expertise". Also, the men were proud of their superiority and reluctant to take over the women's work.

2.) With respect to the social aspect of the tools, so to speak, it is relevant that the men by and large monopolized their manufacture, and that all of them could manufacture almost any tool, trained as they were from an early age. There was no division of labour on this level nor was the labour "complex" as was their appropriation of natural resources, as noted above. Most of the men made their own tools individually, although some were more proficient, rapid or expert makers of certain tools than others. The best made or "extras" were bartered during the Kaush-ketin meetings and at times offered as gifts (see below). Even though the Selk'nam were generous hosts and lent their belongings rather freely, they were possessive about their tools, their dogs and of course their wives (Gusinde 1982 I: 278, 409-12; Gallardo 1910:138, 177. 252). When a person died, his or her belongings were usually burned, buried or perhaps simply abandoned, except the dogs. The same probably applied to the women’s tools, though there is little data on this subject. The tools were personal property but given the fact that all the men could make them, no one man could subordinate another and oblige him to work for him, no matter how expert one might be in making them or using them. For instance Kausel (Pancho Minkiol’s grandfather), famed as an superior hunter, a paautin, supported five wives, but he could not (nor would it have occurred to him) to take advantage of his ability to engage or hire a man as his servant.

To return to the Marxist categories it may be said that the tools, as the means of production, contained use value and only exchange value during the barter transactions. They did not contain "value", that is the labour invested in each tool (or type of tool) was not relevant, even though a well-made tool may have had greater "exchange value" during a barter deal, than an inferior one. Tools were not commodities, nor were they alienated. In this case, the Selk'nam, the ownership of the means of production by virtually all the individual workers defines their relation to society as a whole. Marx (1983: I: 1 32, which I translated from a Spanish edition ) pointed out:

That which distinguishes one economic epoch from another is not what is done, but rather how it is done, with what instruments of work. The instruments of work are not only the barometre indicator of the development of the force [productivity] of work of man, but also the explainer of the social conditions in which he works.

This point will be taken up later as it constitutes the nucleus of my hypothesis.

Distribution and Redistribution of goods

The distribution or circulation of goods is an all important factor in the mode of production (Marx 1980: 262: Godelier 1981: 13) and, as well, in the mode of appropriation. Following Polanyi (Chapter 13 in l957) distribution is treated in terms of reciprocity and redistribution, that is, distribution is described here in terms of Polanyi’s models: reciprocity and redistribution in addition to barter. This differs slightly from his approach which did not include the latter as a distinct category but did include exchange (the market economy of capitalism), mainly because he was dealing with the general, over-all problem of distribution, not

In this society reciprocity of goods took the form of gift giving and exchange, among kin as well as people those who were not kin. However, kin relation did not proscribe or require gift exchange, except for the first marriage. This is quite unusual with respect to almost any type of society. Gusinde also (1982 I: 414) was aware that the practice of gift-giving was "not common". A partial explanation may lie in the absence of chiefs and the slight ritualization among kin of the life cycle (birth, girl’s puberty, and death) that were not occasions for gift exchanges and most were not even celebrated, even the first marriage did not require an elaborate ritual or ceremony (see below). Birth rites were apparently non existent ( Gusinde 1982 I: 343-49: Gallardo 1910: 229-33) except for the care of the umbilical cord. Puberty rites for at the girls, on the event of her first menstration, were more a series teachings on how to be a compliant and hard working wife, than a ritual, though she was in relative seclusion for a week or so, had some dietary restrictions and her face was painted with a distinctive pattern (Gusinde 1982 I: 398-91). In contrast the "coming of age" of the male, which included people who were not kin, entailed a dramatic rite of passage and long , tedious months of training, during the Hain ceremony (see Gusinde 1982 vol. iii and Chapman 1982 and 2003). Many women were "married" by being abducted, or passed on to a the widower’s brother or other kin. According to Gusinde (1982 I: 307-09) the first marriage was ritualized by the exchange between the bride and groom , of symbols of their union. A suitor offered the girl or young woman of his choice (or the families' choice) a small bow, if she accepted it and presented him in return with a bracelet she had made of fiber, this signified her agreement. After the marriage she cherished the bow and gave it to her first born boy as a toy when he was two or three years old, for his first archery practice. The young husband wore his bride's bracelet until it fell to pieces, whereupon she (if she was still his wife) made him another. Also the couple had their faces painted with a distinctive design; strings of dots faning out below both eyes. Although Gusinde noted that such a marriage were celebrated in the bride's parent's hut by an abundant meal, with many guests from distant camps, followed by other meals until all the food (meat) was consumed. As Gusinde (1982 I: 299) affirmed that the young men preferred to find a wife from a distant territory, it is difficult to imagine how the in-laws could manage these shared marriage meals. Gallardo (1910: 219) commented that the brides were so distressed about abandoning their family that sometimes they "exteriorize their sadness which is demonstrated by crying." He added that there was no ceremony, "nothing is done, not even among the families" of the newlyweds. L. Bridges (1952: 222, 359 ) described a young women fondling a bow of her future husband, adding , "Most of the marriage I knew among those primitive people [whom he called Onas] were brought about either by conquest or by abduction." Later he affirmed, "The Ona had no marriage ceremony of any kind. The woman was taken into the man's home - and that was that and he added:

The Ona women had their rights and customs. For instance, it was not considered proper for a new wife, whether a young girl or a mature woman, to give herself away too cheaply. On the contrary, she would frequently put up a good fight and, on his next appearance, the bridegroom might have a badly scratched face and maybe a black eye as well.

The mourning rites were strenuous and long lasting (for the nearest kin of the deceased) however they did not involve exchange of goods. As those related by kin ties were not obliged to exchange gifts, people were free to barter and to exchange gifts with any kin or non-kin of their choice.

The relative lack of rituals for these "rites of passage" was compensated for by prolonged mourning rites and by the elaborated Hain ceremony (when no goods circulated either). However, the celebration or meetings, called Kuash-ketin, did involve reciprocity (as well as barter) and will briefly described here.

Families from all parts of the island met from time to time to exchange goods and to engage in shamanistic and sporting competitions. The name for such reunions was Kuash-ketin, that Federico translated as signifying "the meeting of many people" (Chapman 1982: 35-38; Gusinde 1982 I: 412-16). Those who wished to organize a Kuash-ketin sent a messenger (an oshen) to invite or inform people of certain haruwins (territories of the linages) of such a meeting, stipulating its place and approximately when it would begin. At least in the late pre-contact period, the Haush were invited, if it was to take place anywhere near their haruwins.

During these reunions, goods were exchanged, often as gifts, among kin and friends from different territories. Certain families residents in the host territory received the same families as they had, "since the time of the grandfathers", in the words of Angela. The relationship was reciprocal. The guests would later invite their hosts to a Kuash-ketin organized by them and other members of their patrilineal group. The visiting family was offered a meal, called hamis, which had been prepared by the male host rather than his wife, who usually prepared the meals. Large quantities of meat, fish and whatever else was available would be served. The meat was served on a plate consisting of the shoulder blade of a guanaco or a seal. Angela commented: "They wouldn't eat everything because there would be too much." During or after the feast, gifts were exchanged. Federico explained that the expression wiik haífen, meaning "to make a present to one another," referred to this sort of exchange. And not only gifts circulated; if the guest desired some special object he or she would ask the host or hostess for it. Here the term wíwewan, was employed, meaning " to ask for something, without giving anything in return." However the following year or whenever another Kuash-ketin took place, the person who had received an object in this fashion would normally offer something equivalent to his host of the previous reunion.

Redistribution took place among the men who participated in the hunt, the initial distribution of the game, especially the guanaco, generally occurred shortly after the animal had been quartered or dismembered, before it was carried to the camp (L.Bridges 1952: 22l, 260), This forms part of the work process of appropiation (see above). Once the hunters returned to camp, the hunter who had killed the game had the right to its skin and certain choice parts of the meat, as well as perhaps ankle or shin-bones that were used for different tools. The principal hunter gave his share of the meat to his wife (or wives) who after selecting that which she (or they) needed to feed the family, would, in turn portioned out the remainder to the other families in the camp, before or after cooking it. The accompanying hunters probably did likewise with what was left of the guanaco. The same pattern was followed with a lone hunter. That is, the meat was redistributed in the camp and shared by all the members of the family or lineage who were camping together at a given time ( Gusinde 1982 I: 256, 328, 410; Gallardo 1910: 188). Only exceptionally would the successful hunter who refused or declined to share his game with other families with whom he was camping. As normally every male head of family was a hunter, sooner or later all of them would have killed a guanaco and thereby have obtained its skin that was so necessary for the clothing, tent covers, and so forth. An unlucky or lazy hunter would probably be given some skins and meat by his more fortunate or generous "brothers". The woman, who returned with her basket full of shellfish or other edibles, would do essentially the same as the successful hunter or hunters.

Note that the role of the wife as a "redistributer", in other societies was often assumed by the local chief or headman. As there were none among the Selk'nam , nor were there tribute payments (except retribution, usually of food, that was offered to a shaman who had cured someone) and as the food was usually consumed shortly after it was obtained, never hoarded and only conserved in limited quantities, the redistribution by the women did not privilege them in any special way, though it might enhance or diminish her personal reputation, depending on her generosity or lack of it. Her role or function in the redistribution was simply a custom that the wives were expected to honour. Problems of sharing might arise during times of dire scarcity of the game.

An entirely different form of redistribution took place during a ceremony called Peshere, which was undoubtedly Haush. Lola participated in one near the beginning of the twentieth century when she was camping with her first husband who was Haush. It was then that she heard the chant which she recorded for me so many decades later. During this ritual or ceremony, the shamans met to test and compete with one another performing various ordeals that they accomplished in a state of trance, by chanting with intense concentration. One of the shamans’ ordeals consisted in walking barefoot over burning coals, which the Selk'nam never practiced, in so far as is known.

The entire local community, including the women and children, participated in the ceremony, particularly duiring the finale which delighted everyone. By then various sorts of belongings had been brought to the enclosure where the rituals were taking place; guanaco capes, baskets and almost any sort of ordinary item. When the shamans had terminated their performances, including the ordeals, the attending public felt permeated with great excitement, a sort of frenzy, caused of the atmosphere created by the shamans, in the closed quarters where they had all gathered. At a given moment the adults, including the shamans, began throwing the goods at one another, probably aiming at certain men or their wives. This was done in a cheerful, even hilarious atmosphere, everyone having great fun. A "gift" received would be thrown on to someone else. Some kept the "gifts" for which they may or may not have had use, others were not picked up by anyone and were left in the enclosure to rot. This is admittedly an unusual form of redistribution, as the objects were not destined to benefit anyone in particular, although some may have been offered to certain persons, and in this sense it recalls the extravagant Potlatches of the Indians of the northwest coast of Canada. Gusinde (1982 I: 774-777) attended a Peshere in1923 on the fifth day of the Hain ceremony. He was not aware that it was a Haush custom. Given the large number of Haush who participated in this Hain ceremony , it is not surprising that it had been requested although it was not a part of the Hain and was usually presented by the Haush shamans whenever they "felt" the time had come for it. Angela as well as Lola had told me about it.

Barter was perhaps even more important than reciprocal gift-giving during the Kuash-ketin meetings mentioned just above. A participant or the host brought along, or had on hand, objects which could be bartered for those he needed or desired. Federico told of a Kuash-ketin which he had heard about, held before 1885 on the shore of San Sebastian Bay, in parik, the northern zone, where a whale had just been beached. Those nearby provided roasted rodent tucutuco meat in abundance for everyone. People from Federico's mother's territory (Cape Peñas), south of the Río Grande river, in the hersk zone, brought along bows and quivers to barter or exchange as presents. Those from the K'ami (Lake Fagnano) in the centre of the island, came with arrowheads. People from the Useless Bay area, in the western section of the island, offered branches of a barberry bush from which arrow shafts were made. Arrow straightners were presented by the inhabitants of the Hamker territory, mentioned above, famous for the sandstone from which these tools were made. Others from the southern forest region, came with fox fur capes. "Each brought whatever he had," Federico commented (Chapman 1982: 35-39)

The Selk'nam also bartered guanaco meat and skins with their Alakaluf neighbours, for whale blubber, according to Gallardo (1910: 291). Gusinde (1974: 630; 1982 I: 130, 408, 413) wrote that they bartered guanaco capes, bows and arrows with the Alakaluf for necklaces of various types, seal skins and especially flint to ignite a fire. Gusinde confirmed that they bartered almost anything they possessed and that such exchange was "a real necessity".

During barter transactions the objets obtained what Marx termed an exchange value in addition to their use value. That is the item, necessarily has some use value or no one would be interesting in obtaining it, be it only for ostentation, purely personal satisfaction, such as bracelets. The item acquires a exchange value in the act of being bartered, simply by the act of comparing the objets offered (in terms of their quality, beauty, rarity, etc) that is by the desires or needs of the "exchangers" to obtain the object offered. However it does not have a "value" in Marx's definition, partly because the amount of labour has not been established by any sort of "universal equivalent". The amount, time or quality, of labour is not a factor determining the exchange "value" of the product, so in this Marxists sense it has no such value, however in terms of barter it does, usually, have an exchange value, that is not gagged on the amount labour involved in the product, as mentioned just above. A large guanaco cape, for example, might have taken many man-working hours, to pursue, kill and transport the animal to the camp, in addition to many woman-working hours to clean, scrape, cure the skin and then sew various skins together to produce the large cape. Assume that in all it represented thirty hours of labour. This cape might well be exchanged for something "containing" far less working hours simply because the owner of the cape wanted an object offered because of its beauty or because he needed it at that moment, even though it might have been made in a very short time, of material which was easily available. Obviously universal equivalents do not begin to appear until some sort of money, be it cacao beans, rare feathers or woven cloths are treated as a semi-universal equivalents. The standard universal market equivalent is of course paper money or metal coins of different sorts whose "value" is determined by a what Polanyi described as a "price-making market economy" (capitalism ). Marx's analysis of value was based essentially on the labour hours which money represented, in addition to secondary factors ( in addition to Marx , see for instance my article of 1980 for a treatment of barter as a "universal mode of exchange" ).

Barter may be effected any place, between or among any given set of people. Although its basic principalas may be clearly stated, there are considerable variables as to its characteristics. For instance the transaction which take place today are usually based on calculations of a universal equivalent in euros, dollars, pesos, etc. Some society prohibit such transactions in certain localities, such as places of worship, etc. The Selk'nam practiced bartering whenever the occasion presented itself although not during the Hain ceremony and most frequently, during the Kuash-ketin meetings. Then, as we have seen, besides the gift exchange, the hosts and guests could bartered as they pleased, as usually they were from different territories, each having resources and abilities to manufacture goods which the other lacked or were scarce. Gusinde remarked (1982: I: 413) that there "began to develop a scale of values known to all concerning the price of a thing." Three or four arrows were bartered for a well-made bow, two arrows for a quiver, three fox skins for a piece of tar (used as glue) the size of a nut. However this does not imply that these were semi-universal equivalents but rather that there was a general agreement concerning the exchange value of certain items.

The mode of appropriation and that of production are complimentary. Here one does not dominate the other as Godelier (198l: 85) suggested. Here the men controlled both appropriation and production: the first, namely by hunting and the second mainly by tool production.

The men were privileged with respect to the modalities of the sexual division of labour: not only through their long training, and acquired knowledge since early childhood, as hunters and tool producers, and not only because of the greater economic value of their activities (with respect to that of the women) but also because male labour of appropriation sometimes required coordination of different tasks to achieve an agreed upon objective, more frequently the women's labour. This type of labour corresponds to what Godelier (198l: 21) termed complex cooperation which is more efficient than the unlineal type of cooperation performed by the women for all their labour as well as by the men when they produced tools, for instance. This is relevant to an understanding of the types of labour inherent in the division of labour: on this level (as others) the division was asymmetrical, appropriation and production involved different sorts of labour: the former "complex" for the men , though "unilineal" for the women and the latter, unilineal for both sexes. The greater complexity of the men's labour for appropriation, is a factor (or a cause) of its greater yield and helps to explain, the dominance which the men exercised over the women.

On the other hand, although the women depended on the men for the production of many of their tools, recall that the men’s production was not more complex nor was it more specialized than the women’s, as all the men were more or less proficient in the different tasks involving the production of tools, as were all the women in their tasks. This factor prevented some men (or women) from dominating others and created an egalitarian substructure on this level. In terms of Marx, the lack alienation between the producer and the product and the nature of the goods as having above all a use value ( an exchange value only in the barter transactions) but not a "value" in terms of labour invested in the their different products . These factors are relevant for an understanding on the economic level. However, the economy as a whole cannot be termed egalitarian given the economic relation between the sexes which resulted in the subordination of the women.

The degree of subordination of the women was curtailed or limited in the first place because her labour was economically indispensable, quite apart from her role as the "producer" of children. The men might take over feminine tasks in an emergency but they were unable to do so systematically, routinely. They depended on women's work, even though the men’s appropiation work was more complex and they had a monopoly (on the production) of most of the women’s tools.

The women also had certain rights that somewhat mitigated the male power. A woman's lineage, though patrilineal and patrilocal, constituted her fundamental support, as mentioned previously. She could take refuge in the territory of her lineage and find protection among her kin against an abusive husband, if she managed to escape from him. Her children could do likewise, under certain circumstances, and remain in the mother's patrilineal lineage territory as adults. These considerations lead to the social structure.

*See Chapman 1982, Chapter 2 for more details on this subject.

The social organization of the Selk'nam and Haush, as documented in their final period, consisted of four units or categories, which may be called: one —the division (the "skies" called sho’on ), two - the kindred (Gusinde, see below, gives the term sóker in Selk’nam for what I have called the kindred), three - the localized territorial lineage, the haruwin, and finally the polygamous or extended familiy, the aska that normally lived together in one or two huts, so normally it was a young family, whose off-springs had not yet married.

The fundamental organizing principle which the Selk'nam and the Haush employed to elaborate their cosmology was a circle divided into quadrants. The circle symbolized totality, the limits of the universe. The largest social unit among the Selk'nam and Haush were called "sky" or skies, sho'on, precisely because they corresponded to the cardinal points, the quadrants, that I call a "division" for lack of a better term. Everyone was associated with a sky which was exogamic, marriage being prohibited among people who belonged to the same sky, who were sos-sho'on (one-sky), even though they were not kin. Upon death a person's soul or spirit (kashpix) "returned" to his or her sky in the outer universe. The concurrence of the skies, sho'on and the earths haruwin (see below) was symbolized in the ceremonial Hain hut, which was circular.

There were three skies among the Selk'nam and likewise among the Haush. But why only three if they referred to the cardinal points? Because the skies correspond largely to the spatial configuration of the island. The Selk'nam had no East sky because they did not occupy the eastern section of the island and the Haush had no West sky for the same reason, they did not inhabit the western region of the island. Before the arrival of the Selk'nam to the island (from the continent), the Haush had occupied the entire island (or most of it) and they had probably originally conceived of this division or classification into four skies, which was later adopted by the Selk'nam . As the skies were not defined as kinship units, but rather in terms of their locality on the island, in terms of the residence of the individual. If a person changed his or her residence to a locality associated with a different sky, that person automatically became associated with his or her "new" sky. This would only occur exceptionally, when for example children went to reside in their mother's lineage and remained there as adults.

Not only were the people assigned to a sky, also virtually every familiar element of nature: animals, plants and trees; the hills, lakes , lagoons, and cliffs on the island ; the wind, rain, snow, sea, the sun, the moon, certain stars and by derivation the mythical (hoowin) personages who were to be transformed into these elements. Such was their classificatory or code sytem.

I have labelled kindred as a term to refer to all of a person's blood relations, of the mother as well as the father, back to the third or fourth generation, therefore the kindred was bilateral and varied with each person except siblings, as they had (have) the same relatives. The Selk'nam had kin terms at least for individuals back to the third or fourth generations down to the youngest generation. They probably also knew, as Lola, Angela and Federico did, the personal names of many individuals, back several generations, who were not related to them. But they gave great importance to their kin ties no matter where the relative lived on the island. During the large meetings of people from far flung territories, as during the celebration of the Hain ceremony or a Kuash-ketin mentioned above, a person might meet a relative he had never seen before and request a favour from him or her simply because they were distant cousins or the like.

Marriage was forbidden between a person of his or her kindred, with one exception. A man was permitted, or even encouraged, to marry a daughter of his material uncle, termed ch'é, three or four times removed (see diagram). He could not marry a first or second cousin but could or should marry a third or fourth cousin on his mother's side, that is a direct descendent of his ch'é, his material uncle, a girl of his own generation who was related to him up three or four generations to his great or great great granduncle, on his mother's side. Gusinde (1982: I: 298, 395-96) defined the ch'é as the maternal uncle but he was not informed concerning this preference. He was however aware of the kindred and gave the term sóker, for "a relative of any degree what-so-ever", that is a person's entire ascendancy, the "blood relations" in a direct line "from time immemorial" . He knew that it was exogamic although he thought that, in practice, kinship was confined to the lineage. However the sóker also included the mother's kin while the lineage was strictly patrilineal.

Just why there was this preference for a man to marry a distant cousin on his mother's side is not apparent, nor could Federico or Angela explain it to me perhaps because it had ceased to be respected after the catastrophes provoked by colonization, before Federico and Angela were born. Just why the mother's line was preferred over and above that of the father's seems strange in this patri-oriented society. The obvious though incomplete explanations would be that the patrilineal kin, however distant might belong to the same "sky" and therefore be prohbiited, and the recomendation given to the young men to seek a wife from distant territory, which might well be the case for a cousin of the third or fourth degee in the maternal line. But then why someone related "by blood" ? Perhaps because precisely the importance of kin ties, though this reasoning is redundant and nor does it account for the preference for this particular group of cousins. The female kinship terminology has not as been adquately documented or even studied. If a woman's kin were calculated in the same manner, she could or should marry a cousin traced back to a paternal aunt of the same degree. Even though it might never be adequately explained, this preference does highlight the importance of kinship and the kin ties. For example, the living cousins from three or four ascending generations the "maternal uncles" might well comprised quite a number of possible marriage cantidates for a suitor in pre-White times when the average couple had six or seven children, even though, according to Gusinde, only four survived to adulthood. Again this insistence of the Selk'nam, and probably the Haush, on classifying living creatures and natural phenomena, is apparent. As I already mentioned, everyone had his or her distinctive gamut of sóker relatives (except siblings of the same parents), known by a kin term, and probably often by their personal names and status designations back three or four generations, no matter where they lived on the island.

Normally a group of relatives inhabited a given territory called haruwin, which may translated as earth or earths. The Selk'nam and Haush lived in most the island, except the cordilleras, the sections of the south coast along Beagle Channel inhabited by the Yamana and portions of the Useless Bay and Almiralty Sound where several groups of Alakaluf lived. For the last period, before 1880, the Selk'nam laid claim to at least sixty-nine haruwins and the Haush to eleven in southeastern portion of the island. These have been documented thanks to Lola, and my other informants. However, Gusinde (1982 I: 398-40l) termed the haruwin territory a sub-region of which he documented only thirty-nine harwins. His data was given by various unnamed informants and especially by a woman, called Catalina, whose Selk'nam name was Alamsharke, originally from the northern section of the island. He also defined the local group of such sub-regions as a lineage. I commented in detail (1982: 54-57) on Gusinde’s data concerning why he only mentioned thirty-nine haruwins.

The haruwin group may be termed a lineage in that it consisted of a patrilineal and patrilocal kin group which traced its genealogical record back several generations. It was relatively unstable through time and lacked a common real or mythological ancestor. In this sense it was not a clan. Marriage was forbidden with members of the mother's as well as the father's lineage. A man's mother's lineage was important as even though a man usually remained in his father's haruwin and seemingly considered his father's kin his closest. A woman, upon marriage, was obliged to take up residence in her husband's haruwin. She maintained contact with her patrilineal lineage and might take refuge there when mistreated by her husband, if she could escape from him. I do have several accounts of women who were caught, while trying to escape, by an abusing husband and forcefully returned to his haruwin. A woman’s haruwin was also an alternative for her children, even her adult sons, as mentioned above. A man would always be aware of his mother's territorial group, with her lineage, It could be especially important to him if it had greater prestige than his father's haruwin lineage. For instance he might claim his mother’s lineage for his seating (or standing) place in the Hain hut during the ceremony, because her lineage was associated with a "sky" that had special prestige during a given ceremony. However, he could not change his lineage, much less his "sky", affiliation in every-day life. There is very little information on the relationship which a woman might have maintained with her mother's patrilineal lineage.

In contrast to the so-called kindred, the patrilineal haruwin group was a corporate body for the man. Typically he would be born in his territory, bring his wife or wives there, and spend a good deal of his life camping with his family or lineage in different sites of the territory. If his lineage included other families he would join them from time to time for hunting expeditions, sporting events, mourning rites, and to engage in combats against those in neighbouring territories. But he and his family would often leave his territory: to participate in a prolonged Hain ceremony, a Kuash-ketin or to benefit from a whale which might had been beached in someone else's territory, etc. As implied above, men who lived in the small interior territories would be obliged, during certain seasons, to obtain permission to hunt in neighbouring territories, or simply invade them in pursuit of game, hoping that the neighbours would not be aware that he had, or object if they did detect him.

The word aska signifies, according to Angela and Federico, "close family" It was usually larger than the nuclear family and normally included the kin that lived in one or two huts and migrated together from one camp site to another: grandparents, unmarried uncles, orphaned cousins, etc. In any event it was the smallest kinship entity. The wives of polygamous marriages were often sisters (the custom called sororate). A man either chose such a second wife or his first wife might request to be helped or accompanied by a younger sister. Often also a married man "adopted" his deceased brother's widow (the levirate). Six or seven children for a couple was more or less average, though as mentioned above only four might live to adulthood. Even so and given the frequency of two-wives polygamy a "close family" might consisted of quite a number of individuals. In the large and populous territories, the lineage would be composed of several or more aska groups. In small territories it might consist of only one in which case it could also be lineage given the importance of tracing ascendancy back several generations. However familes did sometime separate from their lineage and claim part of their own or a neighbouring territory thereby creating new haruwins and often conflicts (Chapman 1982: 58-59; Gusinde 1982 I: 410, 595.)

These social institutions, the skies (divisions), kindred, the haruwins (localized lineages ) and the families formed an interlinking system, quite well suited to a hunting-gathering economy. They compensated for the necessary dispersion and isolation of the rather small migrating units (the family or lineage) by motivating people to gather from distant territories to seek a spouse, if for no other reason. With the except of the maternal uncle's (ch'é) daughter category of preferred marriage, all the structures were exogamic, prohibited marriage within these four entities. Each, in its own way encouraged young people to find a spouse in distant territories, or with a distant kin. Even the skies, which were not kinship entities, had a centrifugal effect, because marriage was forbidden with people in the territories belonging to the same sky and these were more or less concentrated in certain regions of the island. At the same time the system was flexible enough to adapt to changes in the land holding , the demography, and intra-lineage disputes, though there were some when a lineage was fractioned. This was not a perfect, harmonious, system, but find one that was or is.

Rather large reunions were common. People were vitally interested in one a other and their respective kin ties; so much so that many decades after the culture had been destroyed, the few survivors I knew still recalled kinship and personal details concerning nearly 3,000 individuals.

Though the males were the dominant sector of the society, within it there were no economic distinctions: every able-bodied person did a share of the labour, and in this sense the society was egalitarian. Yet the individual could distinguish himself, or even herself, from the "ordinary folk" by achieving status and prestige though without benefiting from any real economic reward or economic privilege. But there were no overlords or underdogs, no master or slaves, no chiefs or subjects, no bosses or workers, no executives or employees. L. Bridges (1952: 348) remarked "…I knew from experience the impossibility of placing one Ona in authority over another. They were accustomed to a most communistic way of life. Everyone did as he liked, as much, or as little, as he pleased." He related the following incident (ibid: 216) concerning Lola's great friend Kankoat, which relevant, partly because it was uttered so spontaneously:

A certain scientist visited our part of the world and,in answer to his enquiries on this matter, I told him that the Ona had no chieftains, as we understand the word. Seeing that he did not believe me, I summoned Kankoat, who by that time spoke some Spanish. When the visitor repeated his question Kankoat, too polite to answer in the negative, said: " Yes, Señor, we, the Ona, have many chiefs. The men are all captains and all the women are sailors."

Despite the relative egalitarianism the society was highly competitive. The men, especially, vied with one another to obtain social recognition in the spheres of religion (shamanism), sacred knowledge, physical skills, combats and the hunt and also the lineages were scaled in a certain hierarchy. Their most prestigious representatives interpreted, or slanted, the hoowin tradition to exult their own haruwin or their "sky".

Women, especially among the Haush, also achieve status especially as shamans, and "mothers of lailuka" (the sacred tradition) and exceptionally they competed with the men of equal status. The power of the women shamans could cure but not inflict sickness or death. Therefore they were less feared and less honoured than their male colleagues, nor did the women shamans subject themselves to such torturous ordeals as that of conducting an arrow through their entrails. However, they competed with the men during the sessions called kashwaiuwin-jir, in the striving, during a trance and intense, prolonged chanting, to obtain the summit of mystical achievement in the outer world where the great forces of the universe resided.

The following status were the documented though there may have been others. Only the last one (# 11) was entirely honorific (Chapman chapter 2,1982 for more details). All the others were achieved through public competitions or proven achievements.

l. Shaman: xo'on ( of which there were six or seven specialties, each having an honorific designation, among them the ochen-maten, who was capable of dominating and beaching a whale.

2. Fathers or mothers of lailuka (the sacred tradition) lailuka-ain or lailuka-am.

3. Fathers or mothers of the word: chan-ain or chan-am, which may be translated as prophets.

4. Renown warrior: k'mal. For some reason Gusinde (1982 I: 400-01) attributed qualities to the k'mal, as a honoured patriarch, guardian of the traidtion, a sort of chief and a peacemaker etc., which seems almost completely erroneous.

5. Renown hunter: paautin.

6 . Champion archer: kian-seren.

7. Champion racer: soijen.

8. Champion wrestler: sorren.

9. Renown cormorant hunter: hoorn.

10. Accomplished artisan: haalchin: (chin signifies "hand") men particularly for making bows and arrowheads; the women for weaving baskets and making capes.

11 Hawitpin : handsome, admired by all for his style or flair as well as goodlooks, a sort of superman. A beautiful woman was described as ulichen (or olichen) but this term was generic, although it did not apply to the men, it applied to almost anything deemed lovely. Lola used it for the chants she particuly liked. Also Tul-ulichen, (heart-beautiful) meant someone of either sex who had a good disposion, was kind to others and the like.

The economic strategy employed by the Selk'nam was, to a certain extent, multi-faceted . It offered a gamut of alternatives in the effort to obtain the essentials for living in their difficult environment. Their dependence on the guanaco, determined by a lack of viable substitute fauna and the relative scarcity of edible flora, and shellfish. The predominate role of the men in both the appropriation and production created the subordinate role of the women, despite the fact that the women's labour was as essential to living as that of the men. The patrilocal and patrilineal possession of the territories gave the men the exclusive right to the land, which was important not so much for the hunting grounds of the guanaco as for other fauna and for the natural resources. Even when a man took up residence in his mother's lineage, her father and uncles remained the dominate figures. The fact that the manufacture of goods, tools as well as domestic items, could be taught to all the children and young adults, permitted the producers to master the economy and maintain an egalitarian level of appropriation and production, thus thwarting any possibility of subordination, except the sexual. This "exception" amounts to a cleavage in the society making it impossible to characterise it as egalitarian. It could be called patriarchal-egalitarian but this label appears to be contradictory or specious.

The almost exclusive use-value of the goods is an expression of the economic configuration in terms that Marx elucidated. The goods acquired an exchange value only during the barter transactions which were largely determined by the desires of the bartering partners. Otherwise the goods had no exchange value. This sort of barter also sustained the egalitarian pattern, as no one could profit or "get rich" by exchanging goods or raw materials.

Barter was essential to living, given the difference in the resources of the various regions of the island, and the elusive nature of their main sustenance, the guanaco. The importance, or role, in the society of barter was enhanced by the relative lack of gift exchange.

The highly competitive nature of the society only operated on the level of status prestige and had none (or very little) economic insertion. Everyone physically capable was a more or less a full time labourer, no matter how highly esteemed or ranked his or her status might be. While it created tensions among the male population and accentuated the subordination of the women, who only had a partial access to these status, it did not alter the basic configuration of the economic patterns.

In conculsion it may be stated that it is in the economy, analyzed in terms of the appropriation and production as well as reciprocity and redistribution, that we find the "motor," the dynamics of the society, that which determined, to a large degree, its fundamental characteristics as being partially egalitarian and at the same time dominated by the male sector.

Far from the simple kin-regulated, band society proposed by the exponents of neo-evolutionary theories, or assumed off-hand because the population was composed of hunters and gatherers. Their society becomes more complex in the measure that our knowledge of it increases. Ignorance is often the creator of fantasies, even among scholars.