Texas Paper on Latin America 1

8/14/2019 Texas Paper on Latin America 1

1/20

T E X A S P A P E R O N L A T IN A M E R IC A

P r e p u b l i c a t i o n working p a p e rs o f th eIn s t itu te o f L a tin A m e ric a n S tu d ie s

U n iv e rs ity o f T e x a s a t A u s tin

I S S N 0392-3507


2/20

Linguistic and Cultural Geograpby of Contemporary Peru

G re go ry K nap p

In v ie w o f th e rec ent u psurg e o f in te re st in P eru via n re gion s a nd re gion al d eve lo pm en t (C DI-C ED ES A 19 84 ; G onz le z d e O la rte 1 98 5), it is su rp risin g th at n one of the se discu ssio ns o f re gion al-ization adequate ly takes in to account language or culture . In many countries , regional d iv isions havb een p rim arily b ase d on c ultu ra l or lin gu istic p atte ms, a nd the g rea te st ch alle nge h as be en 1 0 ac hie vebalanced development for all e thnic groups.

T he a va ilab le etbn ic m aps for P eru a re b ase d on la ng ua ge. T he y sh ow sp here s of influ enc e forv ario us lan gua ges (pe sc e 19 69) bu t lac k a qu antita tiv e ba sis a nd d o no t in dic ate th e nu me ric ally prep ond eran t la ng uag es a nd cu ltu re s. T hey a lso do no t d istin guish b etw een cu ltu ra l g rou ps th at a re n otindigenous language speakers.

This report, by using quantitative data of language and ethnicity as found in various censuses,w ill attem pt to m ap the cultural regions of Peru.

Language as a Cultural Indicator

T he re are th ree a dv an ta ges to usin g lan gua ge a s a po in t o f de pa rture in m ap ping a nd d efiningc ultu re re gion s: (1) la ng ua ge is stro ng ly im plica te d in the tra nsm issio n o f cu ltu re a nd is thu s lin ke d tomany nonlinguist ic cul tural t ra its, such as folklore, rel igion, and music; (2) language front iers betweegroups impede cul tural t ransmission and many t imes coincide with other cul tural boundaries, includinagricultural and housing traits; (3) language is a cultural trait that is relatively stable and easy 10determine through census information.

H ere w e w ill d efm e P eruv ia n c ultu ra l re gion s prim arily in te rm s o f la ng ua ge. We w ill a ssu methat language is related 10other cul tural t ra its and 10ethnic self- identi ty (Stark 1985:485) .

Census of LanguageT here w ere na tion al c en su se s o f la ng ua ge in 1 940 ,1 96 1,19 72, a nd 1 981 (tab le s 1 th ro ug h 5).

These censuses d id not reach the entire Peruvian popula tion because of overs ight, hos tility, o r e rror. Iaddit ion, there was a substantial populat ion(poblacin selvcola)b ey ond the re ac h o r kn ow led ge of the


3/20

Characteristics of Language Censuses: Geographical Coverage

The four mod em language censu ses were perfo rmed at vary ing in tervals. In cach case, datawere p ro vided fo r the territo rial u nits of P ero (tab le 1). Peru is divided in todepartamentos (plus oneconstitutional province); thedepartamentos are in tum div ided intoprovincias, which are d iv ided in todistritos.

The num ber ofdistritos increased form 1,064 in 1940 to 1,680 in 1981. Each census hasprovided population data for the urban and rural par ts of eachdistrito.

It is difficult to find base m aps show ing individualdistritos. The oldest such map in the

arch ives o f th e In stitu to N acion al de E stadstica w as u sed fo r th is stu dy (INE 1 982); it shows the pat-te ro ofdistritos about the tim e of the 1981 census (w hich w as virtually unchanged since 1972). B e-tw een 1961 and 1972, 185 newdistritos. w ere form ed. M ost of these w ere created in the eastem low -lands, or in highland or coastal areas with relative1y few indigenous language speakers. Thus the recentdistrito map can be used-with apprapriate care --to map dis tr ibutions from the 1961 census.

T he only m odero census that show s language distributions at thedistrito level is the 1961census (tabIe 1). 1 therefore decided to use this census to m ap language use in the highlands and thecoast.

Language data were not ava ilabIe for rura l and urban areas with indistritos; s ince 1wanted tomap rura l cultu re areas , I ignored resu lts framdistritos containing the provincial capita ls where theseresults differed fram those of surroundingdistritos.

The 1961 census resu lts w ere never pu blished fo r th e Departmen ts o f San M artn , Tacna, an dTumbes. I mapped pattems for these arcas using data from 1941 and 1981 censuses.

In 1961, the Huanca dia lect of Qucchua was rcported as a non-Quechua dialect. To correct forth is , in areas where Huanca is spoken, the numbcr of speakers of non-Quechua dia lects was added to thenumbcr of people spcaking Quechua.

None o f the m od em populatio n censuses p rovid es adcq uate in fo rmation fo r the mapp ing oflanguages in the eastem low lands of P ero. A better source is the recentDirec to rio de ComunidadesN ativ as d el P er (DCCN 1986). This gives the ethno-linguis tic group, pol itical dis tr ic t(distrito), andpopu lation in 1986 fo r each v illage. T he 1 98 6 popu lation is an ad ju sted value, based on the popu la-


4/20

In Tum bes, data from other censuses suggested that nodistrito ha s o ve r 1 .5 p erc en t n ativ elanguage speakers, so thisdepartamento was considered outside the nat ive language sphere.

In Tacna, data of race and language in the 1940 census suggested the location of the edge of theAym ara dom an and nucleus, although w ith less accuracy and precision than in otherdepartamentos.

In San M artn, other censuses suggested that in none of thedistritos does the Quechua-speak-ing L am ista pop ulation exceed 33 percent o f the total pop ulation .

In the eas temselva sec ton of Peru , theDirec to rio de Comunidades Na tivasw as use d to est-m ate th e nu mbe r o f In dia n la ng uag e sp ea ke rs. S inc e th e n um be r of sp ea ke rs w ou ld be co mpa re d w iththe popula tion as dete rmined in the 1981census, it was necessa ry to read justtheDirectorio populatonsbackw ards in tim e, again assum ing a 3.5 percent per year grow th rate. T his am ounted to 0.842 tim esth e n um ber of c om m un ity m em bers in 19 86.

In addit on, the 1981selvcola po pula tion n ee de d to be a dde d to th e n ativ e c om m un ity to ta ls.Theselvcola popula ton was estmated in 1981on thedepartamento le ve . F or e ac hdepartamento, ana djustm en t fa ctor w as c alcu la te d ba se d o n th e p rop orto n ofselvcola popula ton to o ther e lements ofth e p op ulatio n. T he se ad ju stm ent fa cto rs w ere u se d to a ugm ent th e re po rte d in dige nou s c om m untymembers in the component d is tri ct s. The to ta l calcu la ted indigenous communty popula ton ( includinselvcola popula ton) was then div ided by the rura l popula ton of eachdistrito to get a percen tage valueof rura l indigenous language speakers . The formulas used to calcula te the percen tage of the indigenourura l popula ton are presented in Appendx l.

M ap 1 ind ic ate s th e n uc le i of ind ig eno us la ngu age s in ru ra l P eru . D istric ts w ith ov er 7 5 pe r-cen t natve language speakers do not occur randomly but ra ther a re aggrega ted in to a few dis tinct homelan ds. T he la rg est is in sou th em h ig hla nd P eru , w he re the re is a la rg e Q ue chu a-spe aking a re a. T he re ia smaller Quechua-speak ng homeland in the north cen tra l h ighland ( Quechua 1 ). lsolated is lands oQuechua speech include the areas of Caaris - Incahuasi and Cajamarca . Other cultu re groups with la rgn uclei in clud e the Aym ara , A gu arun a (n clud in g a nu mbe r o f re la te d g ro up s), th e a re a o f C am pa a ndShip ibo languages to the eas t o f the cen tra l h ighlands, and the Purs River Valley.

M ap 2 indicates the dom ains of indigenous languages in rural P eru. It includes the centralh ig hlan ds in the Q ue chu a d om an a nd the e xp ansio n o f the A gu arun a a nd th e S hipib o-C am pa re gio nsIn a dd ito n, th e are a a lo ng th e n orth eastem b ord er is in th e do ma in of a v arie ty ofselva groups.

Almost a ll o f Peru is with in the sphere of Indian languages (over 1 5 percen t ind igenous lan


5/20

PERU


6/20

PERU


7/20

r : : : ::1 < 1.5 % Q UE CH UA + A GU AR UN A1961

\himbote


8/20

Modero Cultural Regions of Peru

If areas in which indig en ou s speech p red ominates constitu te cu ltu ral reg ions, one may askabout the ex istence o l' n on -In dian cultu re reg ions in modem Peru. For ex ample, the last census within fo rmation o n race, the census 01 '1940 , pcrm its u s lo m ap the sphere o f the b lack population (m ap 4)which, ckarly, is espec ia lly important on the cen tra l coas t.

Sim ilarly, the census of 1961 contained a question about the custom of chew ing coca. Thenorthcm limit o f co ca ch ewing (see m ap 5 ) helps to indicate the p resence o f p opulations that m ay n ospeak Quechua but sti ll evince considerable Indian cultural traits.

1have been unab le to locate any prev ious attempt to m ap th e cultu ral reg ions o f Peru . Map 5is a ten tative effort, based on the assumption that the great regions of Indian language dominance havserved to isola te and define d is tinct in te rvcn ing areas of mes tizo or Creole cultu re. These in te rven ingarcas, in turn , owe their orig ins to the h is to rical presence of novel agricultu ra l s tra teg ies or the in-migration of non-Indian ethnic groups.

M ap 5 is som ew hat different from the preccding m aps in that it is based on a com posite oflinguistic and n on lingu istic in fo rmation . It is m cant to refer to the situ ation about 1981. S ixteen re-g ions are dcfined, w hich are in dicatcd b y the letters A and Al th rou gh N. These reg ions will b e briefIydescribcd below.

Sixteen Culture RegionsRegin Nortea (A, map5). This region is outside the sphere of indigenous languages

(map 3) and , in add ition, exhibits relatively fcw other indig enous cu ltu re traits; coca chewing is n opracticcd . Eightccn th-ccn tury ccnsuses show a rc lativcly h igh number of non-Indian persons in th is regian. There are som e local areas of blacks (m ap 4); there is also a sm all area of Q uechua speakers atlncahuas i-Caaris . Cities include Tru jillo , Chic layo , and Piura . This region a lso ex tends in to the Lojprovincc 01'sou them Ecuador, which is also, for the mos t part, outs ide 01' the Quechua sphere . Peoplfrom this region have been im portant in colonizing the Peruvian northeast (regions M and B , m ap 5and have brought with them such technologies as r ice agriculture .

C aja ma rqu ino R eg io n (A l, m ap5). This region is, for the most part, al so outsidethe Qucchua sphere , but it exhib its numerous o ther indigenous tra its , e .g . coca chewing. The problem01'the devclopment of a mes tizo cultu ra l iden tity in par t of th is area is d iscussed by Brush (1977:50-53


9/20

PERU


10/20

~::.: : ; :0::::

CJ. ''

PERU

IDIOMA INDIGENABILINGE


11/20

than as Indians. E thnic process has probably been affected by the spread of commerc ia l agricu lture, theinfluence of m ining, and the im portance of railroads. T his region has an active frontier to the east,where Arawakan cul tures are being isolated and displaced by colonis ts .

South Peruvian Quechua Region (E, map5). This is the heart of the trapecioandino and is m arked by a notable dom inance of Q uechua (dialect 11 [M annheim 1985]), as w ell assuc h tra ditio na l sub sisten ce tra its a s lla ma h erd in g. F or m an y a nth rop olo gists th is is th e A nd es. It isthe largest and m ost populated of the indigenous culture regions in any A ndean country and thepresence of the Inca capital, Cusco, adds to its distinctiveness. Any system of political ora dm in istra tiv e re gio ns th at ign ore s this re gio n is ob vio usly c ultu ra lly in app ro pria te . O n the ba sis o frecent evidence , th is region is extending via colonization in to these/va to the north .

Central Peruvian Coast (Region F, map 5). This is the heartland of Creo le cul-ture. T here is a greater Q uechua presence than in thenorteo re gion , d ue lO m i gra tio n fro m th e a dja -cen t h ighlands, but the reasons for the region 's d is tinctiveness a re to be sought in the v icerega l herit ageof L im a, th e d istin ctiv e w ay of life d eve lo ped o n c entral c oa sta l p la nta tio ns w ith slav e la bor (n ote th es trong black presence as indicated in map 4), and the subsequent migra tions of Chinese , Europeans, andothers lOthe core of the Peruv ian economy.

Arequipeo Region (G, map5). This region is centered on irrigated highland basinsan d c oo l c oa sta l v alle ys w he re Q ue chu a is pre se nt b ut n ot d om ina nt. A s e lse wh ere o n th e c oa st, sla ve sw ere im po rta nt in c olo nia l tim es, b ut b la ck s a re le ss e vid ent on the m od em e th nic m ap tha n in ce ntra lco asta l P eru (m ap 4 ). In g en era l, the re is le ss e th nic d ive rsity h ere th an o n th e c entral c oast.

Aymara Region (H, map5). This is the domain of Aymara speech and completes thet rapec io andino . There is some indica tion tha t th is region is cultura lly d is tinct ive in o ther ways, e .g .,because of the importance of quinoa . The region extends across the Bol iv ian border to the eas t.

Amaraceri-M achiguenga Region (1, map5). This appears to be the largest area ofM ad re d e D io s w he re in dige no us la ng ua ge sp eak ers a re still p re do min ant o ver Q ue ch ua -sp eak in gimmigrant gold seekers .

Arahuaca-Pano Region (J, map 5). This region ineludes the Campa and Shipibo-Conibo peoples, tw o of the m ost num erous A mazon lndian groups in Peru. A lthough the Shipiboappear to have good prospec ts for con tinuing domination of their ru ra l t err ilOry, the Campa have beensubject to con tinuing conflic ts with in migra ting colon is ts f rom centra l and southem Peru


12/20

Culture Regions and Frontiers

O ne o f th e a ttrac tion s o f u sin g the c ultu re reg io n a ppro ac h is tha t th e P eru via n fron tier c an besubdivided cul turally. In general , there are f ive Peruvian front iers :

1. F r on te ra nor tea (A /M ). This involves an expansion ofnorteo cu lture in to a re as ofJ ibaroan cul ture , often associated with r ice growing.

2. F ron te ra Sa n M artin ense (B ). T his is the oldest frontier and is largely com plete, as theoriginal cul ture from Moyobamba has spread to the Brazi lian border.

3 . F ro nte ra d e H u nu co (O). This coca front ie r has been very active .4 . F ro nte ra c en tr al (D /J ). This frontier has involved the mos t c ri tical conflic t o f cultu res, as

th e C am pa ha ve b een a ctiv ely e ncirc le d o r pu sh ed b ac k by se ule rs. L oc al ro ad c on stru ctio n ha s pla ye

a vital role. D ue to the proxim ity of Lim a, com mercial agriculture is m ost feasible here. Foreignmigrants , such as the Germans of Oxapamba , have been loca lly important .5 . F ro nte ra c us qu e a (E ). T he se arch fo r go ld ha s d riv en h ig hla nd Q uec hua sp ea ke rs in to th e

sparsely populated lowlands of Madre de Dios.

Conclusions

T he results of this prelim inary report m ay pro v e useful to a variety of persons interested inPcruvian cultures. For planning purposes, the cultural m ap of Peru should be consulted as often asm ap s o f so ils, v ege ta tion , a ltitu dina l zo nes, o r po litic al su bdivision . O nly thu s c an a fu tu re th at ta ke

into account the asp ira tions of Pern 's varied e thnic groups be assured.


13/20(2) X f

Appendix 1. Calculations of Proportions of Indians

S elv a D ep artm entos

T he m ajo r diffic ulty w ith u sin g th e n ativ e c om m unity direc to ry (D CC N 19 86) is th at it is in -c om ple te . N ot a ll c om m un itie s h ave b een insc rib ed . T he p opu la tio n of in dig en ous pe ople thu s h as tobe augmented by an adjustment facto r,/ .

For eachdepartamento, w e w ill de fine a n a dju stm ent fa ctor/fo r tha tdepartamento ba se d onthe 1 98 1 c en su s estim ate s o f the ju ng le Ind ia n(selvicola) p opu la tion . T his ad ju stm en t fac to r w ill b ethe sum of theselv[cola and censused Indian language-speak ing popula tions d iv ided by the inscribedIndian populat ion for thedepartamento. O r a s a fo rm ula :

(1) f =S &

b + d

e

Where:

a=

rural pop ulation of thedepartamento in 1981

b =ru ral popu lation of thedepartamento of five years of age and older in 1981

c =rural popu lation of indigenous lang uag e speakers in th edepartamento in 1981 (of fiveyears of age or o lder)

d =selvicola population in 1981, according to the 1981 censuse =calculated inscr ibed indigenous populat ion in thedepar tamento in1981 (0 .842 times thevalues given in DCCN 1986)

The proportion X of rural persons considered indigenous for eachdistrito is th en calculated as:


14/20

(3) ry=

sa

Where:

Highland and CoastDepartamentos

In the highland and coastaldepartamentos, the proportion Y speaking an Indian language w asd eterm in ed b y the fo rm ula

a =the proportion of the national population that is five years old or older (1961)r =the censused population of the dom inant indigenous language in the district (five years oldor older [1961])

s =the censused total population in the district (1961)Tumbes and Tacna

In Tum bes, there are no published data from the 1961 census, butprovincia data from the1981 census anddepartamento data from the 1 972 census su gg est tha t nowhere does th e indigen ou slanguage-speaking population excecd 1.5 percent of the total.

In Tacna, there are no published data from the 1961 census. D ata from the 1940 and 1981censuscs were uscd lOroughly estimate the boundary of the Aymara domain and nudeus.


15/20

Acknowledgments

In this w ork I have counted on the aid and interchange of ideas of m any person, inc1udingG ra cie la H ern nd ez de B ac a of th e In stitu to N ac io na l d e E sta dstic a (L im a), M ary R uth Wise o f th e In -s tituto Lings tico de Verano (Yarinacocha), Alber to Chirl f, Carlos Mora , Fernando Villiger, Juan Os-sio , M agd a C om arc o, F ra nklin P ea se , M ara R ostow orow sk i, D ale B an dy, M ara B en avid es, M arc iaKoth de Paredes, Jean-Claude Roux, Nicole Bernex de Fallon, Hildegardo Crdova, Richard Schaede l,a nd E nriqu e C arrin . T he pe rso nn el of th e C onse jo N ac io na l de P oblac i n (L im a) a nd th e A rch iv o N a-c io na l d e H istoria (L im a) w ere a Iso v ery h elpfu l. T he re se arc h w as m ad e p ossible b y a gra nt fro m th eC om isi n F ulb rig hl. T he re se arch w as un dertak en w hile affilia te d w ith th e P ontific ia U nive rsid adCallica in Lima.


16/20

Bibliography

B rush, Stephen B. 1977.M ountain, F ield. and Fam ily: The E conom y and H um an Ecology of anAndean Va l/ey. Philadelphia: Universi ty of Pennsylvania Press .

C DI-C ED ES A. 1984.L a c rtic a d el c en tr alis mo y la c ue sti n r eg io na l.(C ED ES A). L im a: C entrode Estudios del Desarrollo.

C ook, N . D . 1981.Demograph ic Col /apse: Ind ian Pe ru , 1520-1620 .Cambridge.-. 1982. Population Data for Indian Peru: Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries.Hispanic

Amer ican His to ric al Revi ew62 (1) : 73-120.Direcc in de Comunidades Campes inas y Nat ivas (DCCN). 1986.Direc to rio de comunidades nativas

d el Pe r . Lima.Direcc in Nac iona l de Estads tica (DNE). 1944.Censo nac iona l de pob lacin y ocupacin.Lima.Direcc in Nac iona l de Estads tica y Censos (DNEC). 1966.VI censo nac iona l de pob lacin . Lima.Gonz lez de Olarte , Efra n . 1985.Economas r eg iona le s del Pe r .L im a: IE P.Insti tu to Nacional de Estads tica (INE). 1984.Censos nac iona le s: VII I de pob lacin, I I de v iv ienda,12

d e j ulio d e 1 98 1. L im a.-. 1982. Repblica del Per: mapa distrital-INE: inventario cartogrfico. Escala

1:2,000,000. Lim a: IN E.Instituto Nac iona l de Estads tica y Censos (INEC). 1974.C en so s n ac io na le s: V II d e p ob la ci n. II d e

vivienda. 4 de junio de 1 97 2. L im a.K napp, G . 1987.Geografa quichua del Ecuador. Abya Yala , Cayambe, Ecuador.K ub le r, G eo rge . 19 52.T he In dia n C aste o f P eru . 1 79 5-19 40 . Washin gto n, D .C .: S mith so nia n In -

s titut ion, Insti tu te of Soc ia l Anthropology, no. 14.M annheim Bruce. 1985. Southern Peruvian Q uechua. In H . E . M . K lein and L. R . Stark, eds.,

S ou th A m er ic an In dia n L an gu ag es : R etr os pe ct a nd P ro sp ec t,pp . 48 1-51 5. A ustin : U niv ersity o fTexas Press.

O ficina N acional de Estadstica y Censos (O NEC ). n.d. U sos y costum bres de la poblacin indiaautctona. R esu lta do s d el V I c en so n ac io na l d e p ob la ci n,vol. 1, tomo 5. Lima.

P ark er, G ary J. 1 963 . L a c la sific ac in g en tic a d e los dia le cto s q uec hua s.R evista de l M use o N a-cional(Lima) 32: 241-252.

Pesce, H ugo. 1969. M apa lingstico del Per. InA tla s h ist ric o g eo gr fic o y d e p ais aje s p er u-anos. Lima: Insti tu to Nacional de Planificacin.

Stark, L ouisa. 1985. E cuadorian Highland Q uechua: H istory and Current Status. In H . E . M .K Icin and L . R . Stark, eds.,S ou th A m eric an In dia n L an gu ag es : R etr os pe ct a nd P ro sp ec toAustin:Universi ty of Texas Press .

Tore ro Fernndez de Crdova, Alfredo . 1964. Los d ia lectos quechuas.Anale s C ient{ ficos de l a Un i-versidad Agraria 2: 446-478.


17/20

Census Date Minimal Unit ofGeographical Disaggregation

Total Population1 Uncensused Selvcola LanguagePopulation2 Population

1981 Distrito Dept. Prov.3 Prov.l,3

1972 Distrito Dept. 4 Dept.l

1961 Distrito Prov. Prov.2 Dist.l

1940 Distrito Prov. Prov.2 Prov.1

Depts.5 Provs. Dists.

25 15 3 1,680

24 150 1,676

24 144 1,491

23 122 1,064

Table 1. Geographical Information, M odero Peruvian Censuses

Number of Territor ial Units

N ote s: ld ata b ro ke n d ow n b y u rb an a nd r ura l a r eas2da ta not broken down into urban and rural a reas3unpublished data available on computer printout4da ta publi shed in 1981a t nat iona llevel only5departments inelude one constitutional province

http://lanic.utexas.edu/project/etext/llilas/tpla/8713.pdf Gregory Knapp Linguistic and Cultural Geography of Contemporary Peru


18/20

1972 Matemallanguage 5 o r o ye r

1961 Matemallanguage 5 or oy er

1940 Language 5 or oy er

Table 2. Language Inforrnation, M odern Peruvian Censuses

C en su s Ye ar Criterion Age Class Language CIasses

1981 L an gu ag e a ct ua ll y s po ke n 5 o r o ye r Q ue ch ua , Ayr na ra , O tr o A bo ri ge n,Quechua-Spanish, Ayrnara-Spanish,Spanish-Quechua-Ayrnara , OtherCornbination

Q ue ch ua , Ayr na ra , O tr o A bo ri ge n

Q ue ch ua , Ayr na ra , O tr o A bo ri ge n

Q ue ch ua , Ayr na ra , D ia le ct o, S pa ni sh

a nd Q ue ch ua , S pa nis h a nd Ayrn ara ,S pa ni sh a nd D ia le ct os, S pa ni sh a ndQ ue ch ua o r Ayrn ar a a nd F ore ig nLanguage



19/20

J uly 1 2, 1 98 1 17,005,210 85.7 727,021 30,000

June 4, 1972 13,538,208 83.7 543,556 39,800

July 2, 1961 9,906,746 83.1 412,781 100,830

June 9, 1940 6,207,967 84.2 465,144 350,000

Ta ble P er uv ia n Censuses, C ha ra ct er is tics o f P op ula tio n

Date Censused Popula tion

% Population5 YearsOld

or OlderUncensusedPopulation

SelvcolaPopulation



20/20

Table 4. C ensused P opulation S peaking Indigenous L anguages

Year Total Population Speaking lndigenous Languages, Adjustedfoe Age*

Quechua** Aymara Other Selvcola

1981 3,755,770 418,743 152,384 30,000

1972 3,602,401 397,363 142,577 39,800

1961 3,232,026 349,127 256,623*** 100,830

1940 2,903,445 275,256 25,480 350,000

2.25 0.49

2.88 0.55

2.57 0.46

* In cl ud es b ili ng ua ls. N um be rs o f sp ea ke rs o f la ng ua ge a ge fi ve a nd o ve r a re d iv id ed b y t he p ro po rti on o f t he to ta lp op ula tio n th at i s a ge fiv e a nd o ve ro

* *l nc lu de s Q ue ch ua -Aym a ra -S pa ni sh t ri li ng ua ls a nd S pa ni sh -Aym a ra o r Q ue ch ua -F or ei gn c at eg or y.

* ** ln cl ud es H ua nc a, e ls ew he re c ou nt ed a s a Q ue ch ua d ia le ct .

Table 5. Average Growth Rates ofIndian Language-Speaking Population, Peru

Years Total Population AlI lndians% Y ear

1940-1961

1972-1981

1961-1972


Documents

Texas Paper on Latin America 1