Talk:Uncontacted peoples/Archive 1

Table
okay-- i found the source document for this table. It should help in the formatting and replacing the goofy characters. I am not sure on the rights of the text, however...

<< >>  Up  Title  Contents B - UNCONTACTED ETHNIC GROUPS

The particularity of Greater Amazonia is that it includes a number of small groups which have little or no contacts with other indigenous populations and even less with non-indigenous populations.

This phenomenon can be explained by the segmentation of indigenous populations in the course of the last two centuries, a minimum strategy responding to the brutal invasion of the area by Europeans. Table 6 and map 3 ("Uncontacted ethnic groups") give as precise a picture as possible, despite inaccuracies that are obviously inherent to this type of inventory. It seems there are 52 such groups (plus 3 which are being contacted at present), an estimated total of about 7 100 people. Many of these ethnic groups are actually only segments belonging to groups which are already known. In this case, they present all the characteristics of an isolated unit (endogamy, no exchanges, a minimal economy...), but nevertheless used to

Map 3 : Uncontacted ethnic groups

belong to wider and more complex cultural and economic entities (e.g. the Akulio or the Tupi-Kawahib, among others).

Since the 1940s, many groups or segments of groups are no longer isolated. They have now been included in the wider context of those Amazonian ethnic groups on which data is available : the Kayapo-Gorotiré emerged on the scene in 1938, the Guavião and the Shavante in the 1950s, the Marubo in the 1960s, the Yuqui and southern Wayãpi in the early 1970s, etc. The impact of policies aiming at pacifying them always turned out to be disastrous, especially in Brazil. This affected their health status, and therefore the group's demography, but also had cultural consequences. It was not rare to see up to a 50 to 70 % decrease in population within a few years (e.g. the Parakanã (Povos indígenas no Brasil : Sudeste do Pará, 1985) or the Waimiri-Atroari (Carvalho, 1982), etc). The relentlessness of national organizations and the resistance with which these populations opposed any form of contact often led to violence, sometimes entailing a near complete destruction of the given group (e.g. the Jora in Bolivia or the Purus Yuma of Brazil).

It is absolutely essential that these uncontacted ethnic groups should not be seen to be in ignorance of the outside world, but rather as groups actively fighting to maintain, as much as they can, a safe distance between it and them.

Besides, though weak demographically, these are the groups now considered as the symbolic guardians of the wild and unexplored hidden backwaters of Greater Amazonia. This is true on the international scene, but also for other native American Indians who do have contact with the outside world. It is therefore absolutely necessary to include uncontacted groups in any project aiming at protecting and improving their environment.

table 6 : Location and demography of uncontacted ethnic groups, by country

Bolivia +/- 450 uncontacted native American Indians

no. name	pop. (estim.) location commentary I	Sinabo/ Kapuibo (Nahua) <200 ?	Between Lower Beni and Lower Yata Pano. Related to the Chakobo. Some sources question their existence. II	Yanaigua 100/ 200	Between the Rio Grande and Upper San Miguel Pano according to some, more likely Tupi-Guarani related to the Yuqui. Mainly hunter-gatherers. They live on the Guarayos forest reserve. III Yuqui +/-100	Between Upper Ichilo and Upper Yapacani Tupi-Guarani.

Small uncontacted group of Yuqui. Mainly hunter-gatherers.

They live in the Amboro national park.

Brazil +/- 4750 uncontacted native American Indians [13] ndeg. nam	pop. (estim.) location commentary[14] IV Apiaka >100 Mato Grosso Norte Between Lower Juruena and Lower Teles Pires Tupi-Guarani. Isolated Apiaka group. Were massacred some time ago. V Apurinã >50 Amazonas Upper rio Sepatini Arawak. VI Arua 75 at most Rondonia 1) Between the rios Mequens and Colorado 2) Rio São Miguel Tupi-Mondé. 1) Living over both the Rio Branco I.T. and the Guaporé B.R. 2) Outside reserves. Area invaded by loggers. Frequent fighting. VII Ava-Canoeiros 30	1) Goias

Sources of the Tocantins

2) Border between Goias and Minais Gerais	Tupi-Guarani.

Small groups of highly mobile hunter-gatherers.

VIII	Guaja

[already counted among the known group] 120 Maranhão Scattered throughout the western part of the state Tupi-Guarani. Small groups of highly mobile hunter-gatherers (even after contact). They have their own I.T. but also move in and out of several other reserves. IX Ingarune +/-100	North Pará Rio Cuminapanema and Paru de Oeste Karib. Related to the Kachuyana. Existence confirmed by the Poturuyar (recently contacted Tupi-Guarani). They live within the latter's I.T. X	Kanibo (Mayo) 120/150	Amazonas Rio Quixito, Javari Basin Probably Pano. Several unsuccessful official contacts. Occasional contacts with loggers. XI Kaniwa (Corubo) 300 9 malocas Amazonas Between Lower Itui and Lower Itacoai Pano. Occasional contacts. Hostile. XII Karafawyana and other isolated Karib 400/500	Roraima and north Pará

1) Source of the Jatapu 2) Rio Urucurina, tributary of the Mapuera 3) Rio Kafuini, tributary of the Trombetas 4) Upper Turuna, tributary of the Trombetas Karib, Parukoto-Charuma sub-group. Related to the Waiwai. Some individuals visit Waiwai communities without warning the authorities. This is how they obtain their metal tools. Partly in the Trombetas-Mapuera I.T. XIII Karitiana 50/100	Rondonia Upper rio Candeias Tupi-Arikem. Identified by the small group that has been contacted. XIV Katawixi 50	Amazonas Upper rio Mucuim, tributary of the Purus Isolated language. One community only has been located. XV Kayapo >100 Mato Grosso Norte Lower rio Liberdade Gé. Identified by other Kayapo towards whom they are hostile. XVI Kayapo-Pu'ro	100 South Pará Lower rio Curuá Kayapo.

Group which has broken away from the Mekragnoti since 1940.

Outside Kayapo I.T. XVII Kayapo-Pituiaro 200	South Pará Rio Murure Kayapo.

Group which has broken away from the Kuben-kranken since 1950. Partly outside Kayapo I.T. XVIII Kayapo-Kararao +/-50	South Pará Lower rio Guajara Kayapo. Group which has broken away from the Kararao. Struggles are part of their traditions. XIX Kulina ?	Amazonas

Rio Curuça, tributary of the Javari Arawak. Small isolate communities belonging to the big Kulina group. XX Maku (Nadeb) +/-100	Amazonas Uneiuxi and Urubaxi Basins Isolated language. Isolated elements of Maku groups that have already been contacted. Hunter-gatherers. XXI Mamaindé 50/100	Rondonia Upper rio Corumbiara Isolated language.

Isolated group of Nambikwara.

A no-entry zone was allocated and then cancelled under local pressure.

Recently massacred. XXII Marimã 30/40	Amazonas Riozinho, tributary of the Cuniuã, Purus Basin Arawak ? Were massacred in 1986.

Their area has recently been declared protected. XXIII Mayoruna 200/300	Amazonas

1) Rio Batã, source of the Javari 2) Rio Pardo 3) Between the Pardo and middle Javari	Pano.

Small isolated communities of the large Mayoruna group. XXIV Miqueleno (Cujubi) ?	Rondonia Upper rio São Miguel Isolated Chapakura language. Area invaded by loggers. Recently massacred. XXV Nereyana +/-100	North Pará

Rio Panama, headwaters of Paru de Oeste Karib.

Perhaps more closely related to the Kachuyana than to the Tiriyo. XXVI Pakaa-Nova of which :

2) Oromawin	+/-150	Rondonia 1) Serra dos Pakaas-Novas 2) Source of the rio Formoso	Isolated Chapakura language. Isolated groups belonging to the major Pakaa-Nova group. 1) Included in the Uru-eu-wau-wau I.T.. 2) Neighbouring one of the Pakaa-nova I.T. XXVII	Papavo [former name used to refer to them] [today] 1) Mashko (Harakmbet) 2) Kulina 3) Amawaka 4) Yawanawa	>400	Acre Scattered over a single large territory :

1) Rio Breu, headwaters of the Upper Jurua

2,3,4) Between the sources of the Envira and the Muru, and Igarapé Xinané, tributary of the Purus, overflowing into Peru 1) Isolated language ; 2) Arawak ; 3, 4) Pano.

Many isolated communities belonging to 4 distinct groups.

Struggling is part of their traditions : reciprocal hostile contacts with the Kampa (whom they plunder), and peaceful ones with the Kulina; they plunder the loggers'encampments.

1) On the extractivist reserve of Alto Jurua. 2,3,4) Two I.T. have been set up for them. XXVIII Pariuaia >100 Amazonas Rio Bararati, tributary of the Lower Juruena Tupi-Guarani.

Probably Tupi-Kawahib.

Have refused all contact since 1930. XXIX Piriutiti 100/200	Amazonas Rio Curiau Karib. Related to the Waimiri-Atroari. Some live in, others outside, the latter's I.T. XXX Sateré ?	Amazonas Rio Parauari, tributary of the Maués-açu Tupi. Communities that split away from the Sateré-Maué a long time ago. XXXI Tupi-Kawahib

(Piripicura) 200/300	Mato Grosso Norte

Between the Madeirinha and the Roosevelt Tupi-Guarani.

A no-entry zone has just been allocated for them. XXXII Uru-Eu-Wau-Wau

[included in the known group] 300	Rondonia Serra dos Pakaas-Novas Tupi-Guarani. There remain over 3 uncontacted groups. Several hostile encounter with gold-seekers and loggers. All are included in the vast Uru-eu-wau-wau I.T. XXXIII Wayãpi (Yawãpi) 100/150	North Pará Upper Ipitinga, between the Jari and the Paru de Este Tupi-Guarani. Group which formerly broke away from the Southern Wayãpi. XXXIV Yakarawakta 20/30	Mato Grosso Norte

Between the rios Aripuanã and Juruena Tupi-Guarani.

Probably an Apiaka sub-group. XXXV Yanomami 300/400	Amazonas

1) Upper Marauia 2) Between the Demini and the Catrimani Yanomami. 1) Within the I.T. 2) Isolated communities ; probably outside the I.T., but within the Rio Branco National Park. XXXVI name unknown +/-100	Amapá

Between the Upper Amapari and Upper Oyapock Unspecified linguistic family :

According to the Southern Wayãpi, a group that formerly broke away from them ;

According to the Northern Wayãpi, one of their former enemy groups, the Tapüiy. XXXVII name unknown 300	Amazonas

Between the Upper Jandiatuba and the Itacoai Maybe a Katukina group. XXXVIII name unknown 300	Amazonas

Igarapé São José, tributary of the Itacoai Seems to be a group distinct from no. XXXVII. XXXIX name unknown ?	Acre

Igarapé Recreio, município Cruzeiro do Sul, Upper Jurua Pano ?

XL name unknown ?	Pará Igarapé Tueré, tributary of the Itacaiunas Tupi ?

XLI name unknown +/-100	Amazonas

South of rio Inauini, Purus Basin ? XLII name unknown ?	Amazonas

Igarapé Umari, tributary of the Ituxi ? XLIII name unknown ?	Rondonia

Serra do Taquaral,

source of the Rio Branco ?

Columbia +/- 500 uncontacted native American Indians no. name pop. (estim.) location commentary XLIV Karabayo 150	Amazonas

Source of the rio Purué, north of the Putumayo Isolated language.

Thought to be Maku, but more likely Yuri.

Overstepping the Brazilian border.

Hostile. XLV Macusa 300	Guainia

Between the rios Guaviare and Inirida Isolated language.

Isolated Maku.

Small mobile groups of hunter-gatherers. XLVI name unknown ?	Caqueta

Upper rio Yari Karib or isolated language ?

Karijona or Witoto sub-group.

Live in the Chiribiquete national park. Ecuador +/- 150 uncontacted native American Indians

no. name pop. (estim.) location commentary XLVII Waorani 100/200	Oriente

Between the Upper Napo and Upper Curaray Isolated language.

Segment hostile to the Waorani. Threatened by the advancing front of oil prospection.

Guyana +/- 200 uncontacted native American Indians

no. name pop. (estim.) location commentary XLVIII Wapishana 100	Between the sources of the Essequibo and the Tacutu;

serra Acarai Arawak.

Isolated segment of the Wapishana group.

They refuse all contact. XLIX name unknown +/-100	Between the Upper Courantyne and the New River Karib.

Maybe related to the Tiriyo.

French Guiana +/- 100 uncontacted native American Indians no. name pop. (estim.) location commentary L Wayãpi 100	Between the Eureupoucine and the Upper Camopi Tupi-Guarani. Group that broke away from the Wayãpi of Upper Oyapock around 1900. They refuse all contact. Peru +/- 550 uncontacted native American Indians

In this country, data on the location and numbers for isolated groups are available though there are no permanent contacts with them. They were therefore integrated in the general list (table 5) which one should refer to here.

Morunahua 150 This group is probably to be related to the group that used to be called Papavo in Brazil (no. XXVII in this table). Parquenahua 200	Pano. They live in the Manu national park. Pisabo 200	Pano.

Suriname +/- 50 uncontacted native American Indians

no. name pop. (estim.) location commentary LI Akulio 50	Watershed between Suriname and Brazil.

Between the sources of the Itani and the Jari Karib.

Last uncontacted segment of Akulio.

They refuse all contact.

Venezuela +/- 350 uncontacted native Indians

no. name pop. (estim.) location commentary LII Yanomami 300/400

[already included in the total for Yanomami populations] Amazonas

Upper Siapa Communities in contact with other known segments of the ethnic group, but they refuse all contact with the outside.

They live in the Parimá-Tapirapeco national park.

[13] We have not included here the 420 isolated people who have already been counted as part of two groups with whom there is now some contact.

[14] The following abbreviations have been used : I.T. : Indigenous Territory ; B.R. : Biology Reserve.

Axxn 07:19, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
The table seems to be incomplete.

New Tribes Mission
The characterization of New Tribes Mission (NTM) as terrorists or as having committed genocide seem to me to be inflammatory unless they have verifiable sources. While my own personal beliefs do not agree with the work of NTM, I feel the current mentions will appear subjective and unverified to the large numbers of Evangelical Christians who have supported NTM or similar organizations. I wanted to edit the mentions and cite sources, but have found little information online. Does anyone have information or sources that will validate the statements?

Wolfromr 04:10, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Those are heavily loaded terms, yes. On the other hand, offending people is not a reason to avoid writing a truthful statement, as is avoiding terms that a select group will see as unverified due to their beliefs (I say that in general, apply it here as you see fit). I do think that that wording is simply too loaded, and agree with the description "subjective" to some degree. Explaining the problems, basically stating WHY those words would apply but without resorting to using them might be a better approach. Note that I'm writing this without having checked the current wording because I want to respond to your point regardless since I think it is a very important one. Personally I would write those words myself except that I believe it would hinder the effectiveness of the article and not help it. I believe religious beliefs should be held as subjective when considered in the realm of editing entries, no matter how much one believes in the "Truth with a capital T" of their beliefs. Just my two cents Fitzhugh 06:46, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

New Tribes Mission
It is well know that uncontacted people does not have natural inmunity against infectious diseases that are carried by white (and other "civilised" people) people carry. Knowing this, insistig on contacting them is a kind of genocide. Of course, this probably is no problem for many missionaries, who believe that they will save the indigenous people's soul, and the body is not important for them.
 * It was me who added the word "terrorist organization". I added it after reading these articles: 1 I used the term because they indulged in physical harm (Shootings, Kidnappings and Rapes) of uncontacted people and not because of making forced contact. Axxn 04:23, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Removal of external link regardng Huichol
I removed an external link to a site claiming to be that of the Huichol people: http://www.shamanism.com/. Link text read "The Huichol Indians - the last tribe in North America to have maintained their pre-colombian traditions unto the present day." This site is very commercial in nature, advertising a wide range of products and services. The single short page on the Huichol people contains minimal information and is approximately half sales pitch itself. The information found on the Huichol Wikipedia entry suggests these people have maintained some portion of their traditional culture, but not anywhere near enough to justify claim made in link. I am not in a position to judge the accuracy of either, but since Wikipedia policy (as I understand it) is to avoid links of a primarily commercial nature and since the link contains very little information, I don't feel it belongs. Secondly, and as importantly, I did not replace the link with the link to the wikipedia entry since the Huichol clearly do not qualify as Uncontacted peoples. In fact, the existence of their webpage alone plus the fact that (according to wikipedia article) they were conquered in the 1600's. However, they resisted outside influence to a greater degree many people, but I do not understand them to have been strongly isolated, let alone uncontacted. I am quite sure the original link was inappropriate, but a little less sure that a link to the wikipedia entry would be inappropriate, but this could use the touch of someone with more of a clue than I have. Fitzhugh 06:35, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

South America section too long - should get its own "LIST" article
I really think that this article needs a new spinoff article entitled "List of South American Tribes" because this article is becoming far far too long with far too much detail on South America only, leaving no room and virtually NO FOCUS whatsoever on Asia (especially Papua) or the Andaman Islands or Africa. Also I added a section about uncontacted tribes in popular culture. I don't think the main purpose of this article should be a long and exhausting list of every tribe in South America. I appreciate the research done and it is admirable but it skewers the whole article and doesn't make it balanced. It's just a giant list. --Mezaco 20:22, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think it is too long. The size of the article is within the limits. However it will be better to add data on the New Guinea tribes. But we can't add unsubstanciated myths and lies. Axxn 12:37, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

can someone add to the article by updating it witht he new found tribe 5/29 in amazon? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.72.156.126 (talk) 05:08, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


 * It wasn't a newly found tribe, just pictures of one known to exist if I understand correctly. Hooper (talk) 14:46, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Changed reference for insecurities in Colombia from paramilitaries to Marxist insurgency since the paramilitaries use to mainly operate in cities and they have since disbanned and would be better refered to as gangs...the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and the ELN are the main groups that operate in these areas and are Marxist in ideology... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.138.74.36 (talk) 19:36, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

That seems high...
'name unknown (Isolados do Arama e Inaui) 	67,000-70,000 	South of Rio Inauini, Purus Basin, Amazonas. ? name unknown (Isolados do Igarapé Umari) 	81,000-84,000 	Igarapé Umari, tributary of the Ituxi, Amazonas. ?'

Sure that isn't a mistake? Population seems... high. Computerjoe 's talk 21:49, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Possibly including the entire tribe's numbers, with some of them being contacted? I wouldn't even begin to know where to find out for sure. Hooper (talk) 13:53, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Pintupi Nine
Why are the Pintupi Nine in Australia listed as uncontacted when they were contacted in 1984? I understand they're no longer isolated at all. 24.68.37.204 (talk) 01:07, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Tasaday article seems tobe argument
does not read encylopedically. Reads more like a "response to the other side". Do we really need this level of detail about the 1986 TV show? There's more on that then there is on the actual people themselves. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TCO (talk • contribs) 14:28, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

No Africa?
There's no mention of Africa in here and I'm quite sure there are some isolated tribes there. Anyone has any info? -- Filip  ( § ) 17:15, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Good point; even if everyone’s been contacted, it should list last/recent contacts – I’ve added a stub section for it.
 * —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 15:21, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Tottally agree. Dentren  |  Ta lk  00:50, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Africa was mostly explored during the Scramble for Africa of the 1870s to 1910s. If there remained any uncontacted people by 1910, they have very likely been contacted more than 60 years ago. The history of the exploration of Africa is not within the scope of this article, but if you have any information on more recent contacts, by all means add it. --dab (𒁳) 15:21, 7 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Seriously? The whole continent? I thought there were still tons of uncontacted tribes within the well-contacted (but large) established countries of Africa. There's so much room, it can't have all been combed through. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.77.60.53 (talk) 18:50, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

If there is a section on the last known individual to be contacted in North America, which does fall within the scope of this article, why is there no mention of the last contacted tribes of Africa? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.47.60.146 (talk) 23:30, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

No Europe?
For completeness & history, one should mention when the last European groups were contacted (presuming that there are no uncontacted peoples remaining in Europe); I’ve added a stub section for this purpose.

Are there any in Russia? Otherwise I’d guess last peoples would be Sami people.
 * The sami were known by and traded with the vikings. Dentren |  Ta lk  00:49, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Some issues of definition; do we mean “when the Romans heard about a peoples”, or “When the English king” heard about them or “When became generally known?”: Ohthere of Hålogaland mentioned Sami to the English in 890, which gives a data point.

—Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 15:21, 30 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I believe that would be a rather sad list of conquests. Picts, for example could be included. 80.186.147.214 (talk) 12:02, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

There are no uncontacted peoples in Europe. "Uncontacted peoples" are peoples not "contacted" today. It is pointless to extend this category into the Iron Age, as it will unavoidably an arbitrary question who are the contactors and who are the contactees. If you want to make out the Picts were "uncontacted" you are implying that the "contacting" is described from the point of view of the Romans. Before the rise of the Roman Empire, the notion of "contact" becomes completely arbitrary. --dab (𒁳) 15:11, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Too Lopsided in favour of South America
This article is so lopsided in favour of South America. It's about 90% South America content. I think that Papua New Guinea deserves far more credit and mention. It's too long. Do we really need to know the eexact # of people in every single tribe uncontacted tribe in South America. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.46.0.199 (talk) 02:37, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes of course we need to know the exact details of every single tribe. That's the whole point of wikipedia! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.211.232.54 (talk) 05:51, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Belarussian 'tribe' in the section "Europe"
The story about an uncontacted Belarussian people were added by an anonym without any source. I tried to Google the word "Syusonav" mentioned in this text, but the only result is this article in wikipedia. Wtf is this? 77.126.227.120 (talk) 20:48, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

incorrect image
India should be highlighted due to uncontacted peoples in the Andaman islands. --129.11.12.201 (talk) 04:21, 26 November 2009 (UTC)