The indigenous toponymy in the early Argentinean maps (1865-1886)

CARLA LOIS

Berna (Suiza)

Conferencia; 22nd Internacional Conference on the History of Cartography; 2007

Swiss Society of Cartography, Cartographica Helvetica and Imago Mundi Ltd, University of Berne, Institute of Cartography of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich

During the Argentinean state-formation process, in the second half of the nineteenth century, the ruling elites developed several policies directed at outlining the national territory. They consisted in: a) establishing the international boundaries with respect to the adjacent states —which were also outlining their own territories; and b) occupying the indigenous territories in Chaco (northwest) and Patagonia (south), both comprising 40% of the Argentinean territory. This process was accompanied by the production of cartographies. The national governments entrusted general maps to foreign professionals (Parish, De Moussy, Napp, Burmeister). The army traced out plans while advancing on indigenous territory, especially after the military campaigns to the south (1879) and the north (1884). Besides, the geography societies organized expeditions to Chaco and Patagonia; drew maps and published glossaries of indigenous languages. The maps printed under official seal between 1865 (De Moussy) and 1886 (Argentinean Geographical Institute Atlas) show variations in the use of the indigenous toponymy: some toponyms were reproduced in indigenous languages, others were Hispanicized and a side column was even added to the plan, with hundreds of words “translated”, resembling a “dictionary”. Are these variations explained by approaches or perspectives related to science? Was the use of indigenous terms related to the ethnographic and geographical knowledge of Chaco and Patagonia? Did the maps officially recognized, published in English, French, and German, make the same use of the indigenous toponymy as the maps drawn by the national army? Have the ways of using the indigenous toponymy responded to a systematic linguistic policy? These questions will be addressed in this communicative exchange.