Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T16:57:39.419Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Colonial Collecting Expeditions and the Pursuit of Opportunities in the Amazonian Sertão, c. 1750–1800

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2015

Heather Flynn Roller
Heather Flynn Roller*
Affiliation:
Stanford UniversityStanford, California
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Every year during the second half of the eighteenth century, as river levels dropped, an average of 1,500 Indian crewmen departed nearly 50 villages for the remote interior forests and waterways of the Amazonian sertão. During the next six to eight months, as they searched for cacao, sarsaparilla, nuts, or turde eggs, the crewmen might experience all manner of hardships—epidemics, tribal attacks, famine, mutinies, or the loss of the village canoe and its cargo, to name just a few. Then, upon arriving home, they might find their families reduced to utter poverty or sickness, their wives taken in by other men, or their crops abandoned and devoured by pests. Yet despite the arduousness of the state-sponsored collecting expeditions and the hardships imposed upon those left behind, the trips offered a range of opportunities that other kinds of compulsory labor did not. Some of those who were not required to participate, such as the native officials, even did so voluntarily.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Americas , Volume 66 , Issue 4 , April 2010 , pp. 435 - 467
Copyright
Copyright © Academy of American Franciscan History 2010

References

I am grateful to Zephyr Frank, Tamar Herzog, William B. Taylor, Mark Harris, Sylvia Sellers-Garcia, and the two anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments on earlier versions of this article. Funding was provided by Stanford University, the Woodrow Wilson Foundation, the Fulbright-Hays Commission, and the Mabclle McLeod Lewis Memorial Fund. I also wish to thank David Sweet, Stuart B. Schwartz, and Barbara Sommer for their early encouragement of my interest in colonial Amazonian history.

Abbreviations used in the notes are as follows: Arquivo Publico do Estado do Pará, Belcm (APEP); Arquivo Histórico Ultramarino, Lisbon (AHU); Arquivo do Instituto Histórico e Geográfico Brasilciro, Rio de Janeiro (AIHGB); Biblioteca Nacional, Rio de Janeiro (BNRJ); and Arquivo Nacional da Torre do Tombo, Lisbon (ANTT). Abbreviations in the document citations refer to Caixa (Cod.), Documento (Doc), Códice (Cod.), and Fòlio (fl.). All source translations are my own; punctuation has sometimes been inserted to clarify meaning, and tense usage has been rendered more consistent.

1. Adequate English translations of the term sertao include backlands, wilderness, or frontier. On the various meanings attached to the term and its usage among colonial authors as well as historians, see Hal, Langfur, The Forbidden Lands: Colonial Identity, Frontier Violence, and the Persistence of Brazil’s Eastern Indians, 1750–1830 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2006), pp. 4,Google Scholar 292–294. For sources on average crew sizes, see note 15.

2. In her dissertation, Barbara Sommer presented several cases of voluntary participation in the expeditions that initially sparked my interest in the phenomenon (“Negotiated Settlements: Native Amazonians and Portuguese Policy in Para, Brazil, 1758–1798” [Ph.D. dissertation, University of New Mexico, 2000], pp. 135–136, 281), as did David Sweet's passing observation, for an earlier period of Amazonian history, that Indians seemed to have preferred working as crewmen on slaving expeditions to other types of colonial service that did not entail a trip to the sertao (“A Rich Realm of Nature Destroyed: The Middle Amazon Valley, 1640–1750” [Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin, 1974], p. 580).

3. The literature on the Directorate has expanded in recent years to include case studies of its interpretation and application in the different colonial captaincies of Brazil. On the Directorate in Brazil in general, see Rita Heloisa, Almeida, O Diretório dos Indios: Um projeto de civilizaçào no Brasil do sécalo XVIII (Brasilia: Editora Universidade de Brasilia, 1997).Google Scholar On Amazonia, see Nádia, Farage’s pathbreaking book, As Muralhas dos Sertoes: Os povos indígenas no Rio Branco e a colonizaçâo (Rio de Janeiro: ANPOCS, 1991);Google Scholar Angela, Domingues, Qttando os indios eram vassales. Coloniza-çâo e relaçôesde poder no Norte do Brasil na segunda metade do século XVIII (Lisbon: Comissào Nacional para as Comcmoraçôes dos Descobrimentos Portugueses, 2000);Google Scholar Sommer, “Negotiated Settlements”; Patricia Maria Melo Sampaio, “Espelhos Partidos: Etnia, Lcgislaçào e Desigualdade na Colònia Scrtòes do Grao-Pará, c. 1755–1823” (Ph.D. dissertation, Universidade Federal Fluminense, 2001); and Mauro Cezar Coelho, “Do sertào para o mar—Um estudo sobre a experiencia Portuguesa na America, a partir da Colònia: o caso do Diretório dos indios (1751–1798)” (Ph.D. dissertation, Universidade de Sao Paulo, 2005). On the Directorate in Bahia, see Barickman, B.J., “‘Tame Indians,’ ‘Wild Heathens,’ and Settlers in Southern Bahia in the Late Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries,” The Americas 51:3 (January 1995), pp. 337–351.Google Scholar For Ceará, see Braz, Isabelle Silva, Peixoto da, Vilas de indios no Ceará: Dinámicas Locáis sob o Diretório Pombalino (Campinas: Pontes Editores, 2006).Google Scholar For Rio de Janeiro there is the excellent analysis of Maria Regina Celestino de Almeida, Metamorfoses Indígenas: identidade e cultura ñas aldeias colonials do Rio de Janeiro (Rio de Janeiro: Arquivo Nacional, 2001).

4. The directors’ reports are held at APEP, scattered among more than 400 codices in the Correspondencia de Diversos com o Governo series.

5. Secondary sources that describe the collecting expeditions generally rely on either the Directorate legislation itself or the account of the Jesuit chronicler Joâo Daniel (see note 10). These include Colin MacLachlan, M., “The Indian Directorate: Forced Acculturation in Portuguese America,” The Americas 28:4 (April 1972), pp. 357–387;CrossRefGoogle Scholar John, Hemming, Amazon Frontier: The Defeat of the Brazilian Indians (London: MacMiilan, 1987), pp. 43–46;Google Scholar Robin Anderson, “Following Curupira: Colonization and Migration in Para, 1758 to 1930 as a Study in Settlement of the Humid Tropics” (Ph.D. dissertation, University of California at Davis, 1976), pp. 27–45; Regina, Maria Almeida, Celestino de, “A Falacia do Povoamcnto: Ocupaçào Portuguesa na Amazonia Sctccentista,” in in Meandros da Historia: Trabalho e poder no Pará e Maranháo, SécalosXVIII e XIX, ed. Cezar Coelho, Mauro, et al. (Belem: UNAMAZ, 2005), pp. 21–33;Google Scholar and Sampaio, “Espelhos Partidos,” pp. 146–153. Two recent studies that delve more deeply into local sources on extractive activities are Sommer, “Negotiated Settlements,” pp. 119–136; and Coelho, “Do sertao para o mar,” pp. 230–243, 281. Their systematic use of village-level correspondence has laid to rest any lingering doubts about the feasibility of studying colonial Amazonian history and its native protagonists.

6. Some of the most influential or pioneering works in this vein include Farage, , As Muralhas dos Sertôes; the collection of essays in Manuela Carneìro, da Cunha, ed., Historia dos Indios no Brasil (Sao Paulo: Schwarcz, 1992);Google Scholar Domingues, Quando os indios eram vassalos; Sommer, “Negotiated Settlements”; and Almeida, Metamorfoses Indígenas.

7. Padre Domingos de Araújo, “Chronica da Companha de Jesus da Missao do Maranhao, escripta em 1720,” AIHGB, 1.2.32, Livro 1, Capítulo 11, fol. 62.

8. There was at least one short-lived export boom before the Directorate period, in cacao from 1730–1734. See Dauril, Aldcn, “The Significance of Cacao Production in the Amazon Region During the Late Colonial Period,” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 120:2 (April 1976), p. 120.Google Scholar

9. For annual export data from 1730–1755, see “Mappa dos diferentes Géneros, que dos Livros d’Alfandega da Cidade do Para consta se exportarào do seu Porto, desde o anno de 1730, athé o de 1755” AHU, Para Avulsos, Cod. 80, Doc. 6627. For comparison, export figures during Directorate years (1756–1777) are available in the same document. In his analysis of cacao export data in this series, Alden found that yearly export averages were slightly lower during the latter period (when the royal trading company, the Companhia Geral do Comercio, operated), but the downward trend in exports of the late 1740s and early 1750s was reversed (Alden, “The Significance of Cacao Production,” p. 126).

10. Joao, Daniel, Tesouro Descoberto no Máximo Rio Amazonas [c. 1758–1776] (Rio de Janeiro: Contraponto, 2004), vol. 2, p. 248.Google Scholar On epidemics, see Arthur, Vianna, As epidemias no Para (Belem: Universidade Federal do Para, 1975);Google Scholar and Alden, Dauril and Miller, Joseph C., “Out of Africa: The Slave Trade and the Transmission of Smallpox to Brazil, 1560–1831,” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 18:2 (1987),pp. 195–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11. A general treatment of the Pombaline reforms is offered by Kenneth, Maxwell, Pombal: Paradox of the Enlightenment (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995).Google Scholar

12. According to David Sweet, private collecting expeditions during the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries often collected as many Indian slaves as they did forest products, and slaving activities—carried out under the auspices of officially licensed collecting expeditions—continued even after government slave-ransoming expeditions were reauthorized in the 1720s (“A Rich Realm,” pp. 468–470).

13. Robin Anderson detects a shift in Directorate economic policy around 1788 or 1789, when the attention of village directors and governors turned towards agricultural activities and away from collecting expeditions. She attributes this to changing priorities among policymakers who confronted population declines in the Indian villages as well as shortages in wild products due to overexploitation (“Following Curupira,” pp. 121–122). The encouragement of agriculture in the villages was not a new idea—the Directorate legislation itself identified it as a top priority—but very little agricultural development seems to have taken place in the villages until Governor Joao Pereira Caldas came into office, in the 1770s, with a mandate to increase production of crops for both local consumption and export. Despite improved agricultural production during his tenure, extractive activities were a mainstay of the economy well into the following decade.

14. Labor distribution data is summarized in Ibid., p. 125.

15. Data on average crew sizes was gleaned from AHU, Pará Avulsos, Cod. 71, Doc. 6055 (for the year 1772); Cod. 72, Doc. 6102 (for 1773); Cod. 76, Doc. 6389 (for 1775); Cod. 79, Doc. 6533 (for 1776); Cod. 81, Doc. 6648 (for 1777 and 1778); Cod. 88, Doc. 7212 (for 1779-1781); Cod. 98, Doc. 7790 (for 1788).

16. Cacao production data for the Directorate villages is available in the “Mapa(s) gerai(s) do rendimento” series in AHU, Para Avulsos, Cods. 51, 61, 64, 66, and 69. To determine the portion of cacao supplied by Directorate villages, I compared production data from a seven-year sample (1761–1772) of these mapas with total cacao export data available in AHU, Para Avulsos, Cod. 80, Doc. 6627 for those same years; some but not all of this data is available in Alden, “The Significance of Cacao Production,” pp. 124–125. On the emerging “cacao corridor,” see his p. 126, note 173. The Indian villages may have collected even more cacao when they were run by missionaries, if one royal investigator’s figures are correct; sec the “Còpia da informaçào e parecer do Desembargador Francisco Duarte dos Santos, que sua Mages-tade mandou ao Maranhào em 1734, para se informar do governor temporal do indios e queixas contra os missionários [1735],” in Corographia Histórica, Cronográphica, Genealógica, Nobiliaria, e Política do Imperio do Brasil, de Mello Moraes, A.J., ed. (Rio de Janeiro: Typographia Brasileira, 1860), pp. 139–140.Google Scholar

17. Alden, , “The Significance of Cacao Production,” p. 132.Google Scholar

18. Diretório, que se deve observar ñas povoaçôes de indios, Article 46, reproduced in José Oscar, Beozzo, Lets e Relimemos das Missòes: Política Indigenista no Brasil (Sào Paulo: Ediçôes Loyola, 1983).Google Scholar

19. Ibid., Article 50.

20. Ibid., Article 52.

21. References to female participants can be found in the following APEP codices: Cod. 177, Doc. 38; Cod. 190, Doc. 23, Doc. 40, and Doc. 53; Cod. 201, Doc. 94; Cod. 202, Doc. 65; Cod. 202, Doc. 74; Cod. 491, unnumbered doc, fis. 49–51; Cod. 491, unnumbered doc, fis. 45–48; Cod. 497, unnumbered doc, fis. 35–38; Cod. 517, Doc 31. Sending women on collecting expeditions was specifically forbidden by the Intendente Luís Gomes de Faria c Souza during the early Directorate period (see his letter to Francisco Xavier de Mendonça Furtado, September 15,1762, AHU, Para Avulsos, Cod. 53, Doc. 4839), but the practice nevertheless continued.

22. Diretório, Article 53, in Beozzo, , Lets e Rejjimentos; and Daniel, Tesouro Descoberto, vol. 2, p. 91.Google Scholar Despite the stipulation that cabos be nominated by municipal councils and village headmen, cabos were often appointed by the governor, supposedly because there were no “suitable” candidates in the villages (Intendente G eral do Comercio Mathias José Ribeiro to Governor Martinho de Souza Albuquerque, Belém, November 27, 1783, AHU, Pará Avulsos, Cod. 90, Doc. 7366).

23. Diretório, Artide 56, in Beozzo, Lets e Regimentos. The cabo’s percentage was not actually specified in the legislation but was later set at 20% (MacLachlan, “The Indian Directorate,” p. 366). A detailed listing of the payments-in-kind made to each crew member, along with their monetary value, can be found in Director Luis de Amorini to governor, Boim, October 23, 1760, APEP, Cod. 107, Doc. 83. This shows the three pilots earning goods valued at 14$205 ra* each; the two bowmen earning 12$ 171; and the rest of the 26 crewmen earning between 8$955 and 9$263. The difference in payments among the regular crewmen would correspond to whether the one had gone to work for himself (and had therefore received a cut of the profits) or had worked on behalf of the native officials for a fixed salary.

24. Governor Francisco de Souza Coutinho to Queen Maria I, Belém, March 22,1791, AHU, Para Avulsos, Cod. 100, Doc. 7963.

25. Diretório, Article 58, in Beozzo, Lets e Regimentos.

26. “Formalidade, q’ se costuma observar no Negocio feito nos Sertôes” Intendente Gérai do Comércio Mathias José Ribeiro to Governor Martinho de Souza Albuquerque, Belém, November 27, 1783, AHU, Pará Avulsos, Cod. 90, Doc. 7366. For more on the seasonal navigation of Amazonian river routes, see Roberta Marx, Delson, “Inland Navigation in Colonial Brazil: Using Canoes on the Amazon,” International Journal of Maritime History 7 no. 1 (1995), pp. 1–28;Google Scholar and Davidson, David Michael, “Rivers and Empire: The Madeira Route and the Incorporation of the Brazilian Far West, 1737–1808” (Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 1970).Google Scholar

27. Daniel, , Tesouro Descoberto, vol. 2, pp. 79–94,Google Scholar especially p. 84.

28. Desembargador Luis Gomes de Faria e Souza to the Secretario de Estado da Marinba e Ultramar, Francisco Xavier de Mendonça Furtado, Belém, November 17, 1761, AHU, Para Avulsos, Cod. 51, Doc. 4689.

29. Ibid, to the Secretario de Estado da Marinha e Ultramar, Francisco Xavier de Mendonça Furtado, Belém, 3 August 1761, AHU, Pará Avulsos, Cod. 50, Doc. 4593.

30. Written during his tenure as governor and included as an attachment to a letter to the queen. Governor José de Ñapóles Telo e Menezes to the Secretario de Estado da Marinha e Ultramar, Martinho de Melo e Castro, Belém, November 28, 1780. Attached Doc. 1 in AHU, Pará Avulsos, Cod. 94, Doc. 7502.

31. Attached Doc. 1 in AHU, Pará Avulsos, Cod. 94, Doc. 7502.

32. Attached Doc. 4 in AHU, Pará Avulsos, Cod. 94, Doc. 7502.

33. For another contemporary account with a similar tone, see Antonio José, Pestaña e Silva, “Meios de Dirigir o Governo Temporal dos indios [1770s?],” in Corographia Histórica, Cronqgráphica, Genealógica, Nobiliaria, e Politica do Imperio do Brasil, ed. de Mello Moraes, A.J. (Rio de Janeiro: Typographia Brasileira, 1860), pp. 140–142.Google Scholar

34. Director Venuslào José de Souza Moraes to governor, Boim, [n/d] 1777, APEP, Cod. 317, Doc. 12.

35. See, for example, Arthur Cézar, Ferreira Reis, A politica de Portugal no valle amazónico (Belem: Secretaria do Estado da Cultura, 1993), pp. 54–55;Google Scholar Caio Prado, Junior, The Colonial Background of Modern Brazil (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967), pp. 246–248;Google Scholar Hemming, Amazon Frontier, p. 45; MacLachlan, , “The Indian Directorate,” pp. 374–375;Google Scholar Robin, Anderson, Colonization as Exploitation in the Amazon Rain Forest, 1758–1911 (Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 1999), pp. 34–35;Google Scholar Maria Regina, Celestino de Almeida, “Os Vassalos d’El Rey nos Confins da Amazonia: A Colonizaçào da Amazonia Ocidental, 1750–1798,” Anaisda Biblioteca Nacional 112 (1992), p. 72.Google Scholar

36. Director Manoel Ignacio da Silva to governor, Sousel, August 17,1764, APEP, Cod. 141, Doc. 36. My attention was first drawn to this case by Sommer, “Negotiated Settlements,” pp. 135–36 and 215, where the document is also quoted. As she points out, Theódosio Ferreira did end up holding the post of Alferes but was listed as absent from his village in 1776 (p. 215).

37. Director Bclchior Henrique Weinholtz to governor, Pinhel, April 18, 1770, APEP, Cod. 215, Doc. 53; Director Francisco Ruberto Pimentel to governor, Portel, September 16, 1778, APEP, Cod. 330, Doc. 53; Director Faustino Antonio de Souza to governor, Veiros, September 18,1772, APEP, Cod. 244, Doc. 15; and Director Francisco Ruberto Pimentel to governor, Portel, October 13, 1779, APEP, Cod. 346, Doc. 21. For additional cases of voluntary participation (including that of Indian officials), see the following APEP documents: Cod. 129, Doc. 93; Cod. 142, Doc. 371; Cod. 175, Doc. 3; Cod. 236, Doc. 18; Cod. 389, Doc. 31; Cod. 423, Doc. 13; Cod. 561, Doc. 4.

38. Directors’ reports indicate that tabor at the forts (especially Macapá) was the most frequently deserted type of service, followed by construction projects elsewhere in Pará (i.e., in Mazagào and Belém).

39. Cases of Indians fleeing prior to the departure of the collecting canoe can be found in the following APEP documents: Cod. 177, Doc. 74; Cod. 201, Doc. 62; Cod. 218, Doc. 45; Cod. 257, Doc. 69; Cod. 472, Doc. 27. On Indians who went to the sertao but then avoided the trip to Belém, see APEP Cod. 198, Docs. 53 and 61; Cod. 214, Doc. 10; Cod. 258, unnumbered doc; Cod. 312, Doc 26; Cod. 328, Doc 6; Cod. 470, Doc. 80. It was not uncommon for crewmen to be waylaid in Belém for up to three months, their labor diverted to royal building projects, canoe trips to Marajó Island, or private service. This was technically illegal, but many governors sanctioned the practice, and such experiences may explain why many Indians preferred to absent their villages temporarily in order to avoid the trip to the city (Intendente Joâo de Amorini Pereira to the Secretario de Estado do Negocios do Reino e Mercês, Belém, December 31,1777, AHU, Pará Avulsos, Cod. 78, Doc. 6508; and Manoel Bernardo de Melo e Castro to Francisco Xavier de Mendonça Furtado, Belém, August 17, 1761, in AN 11, Ministerio do Reino, Informaçôes dos governadores e magistrados das Uhas Adjacentes e Ultramar, Maço 597 (Cod. 700), unnumbered document

40. See note 15 for sources.

41. Sommer, “Negotiated Setdements, pp. 135–136, 281; and Coelho, “Do sertào para o mar,” p. 281.

42. Devassa of Cabo José da Silva Godinho, Pinhei, July 27, 1771, APEP, Cod. 234, Doc. 44.

43. The Jesuit Joao Daniel wrote that the position of pilot is “a trade and art that among them [the Indians] is one of the most dignified posts in their settlements, and they [the pilots] are respected and obeyed by the native residents (nacionaisy (Daniel, , Tesouro descoberto, vol. 1, p. 343;Google Scholar and on bowmen, see p. 346). Just as jacumat’tba—from the Tupi-bascd lingua gcral word for the piece of wood (Jacumâ) typically used in place of an oar—appears in the sources more often than the Portuguese term piloto, one commonly encounters native terminology for the expedition canoes (igarités, ubás), the types of waterways traversed (igarapés), and the products collected in the sertao (such as andiroba and copaiba oils). On indigenous influences on colonial canoe fabrication and design, see Delson, , “Inland Navigation”; and the classic work by de Holanda, Sergio Buarque, Monçdes (Rio de Janeiro: Casa do Estudante do Brasil, 1945).Google Scholar Canoe fabrication is described in Daniel, Tesouro descoberto, vol. 2, pp. 47–56.

44. In the 1760s, the Intendente Geral mandated a minimum of eight days of rest between the return of the collecting canoe from the sertao and its departure to Belém (mentioned in Director José Couto Ferreira da Silva to governor, Soure, September 3, 1769, APEP, Cod. 202, Doc. 67).

45. The devassas of the cabos are appended to some of the directors’ reports in the Correspondencia de Diversos com o Governo series at APEP. Aside from several devassas in Codex 258 that were too damaged to be legible, I believe that I consulted all those that exist in the archive, and none are known to exist in other repositories. Note: included in the total of 185 devassas are five “summaries” of devassas contained in the directors’ correspondence (no formal devassa was available).

46. The outcomes of negative devassas are mostly unknown, though it is telling that new cabos were often assigned for the following year’s expedition (implying that the offending cabo had been removed). I was able to connect a few devassas to subsequent references to cabos being imprisoned; see, for example, the devassa of Cabo Antonio José da Silva, Pombal, September 28, 1773, APEP, Cod. 2633, Doc. 22; and the letter that mentions his imprisonment the following year, Director Francisco Coelho da Silva to governor, Pombal, August 30, 1774, APEP, Cod. 269, Doc. 76.

47. Devassa of cabo Francisco de Brito Mendes, Oeiras, August 18, 1772, APEP, Cod. 240, Doc. 19.

48. Another major gap in coverage is due to a c. 1775 order for the directors to send the devassas to the Intendente Cerai do Comercio instead of the governor; the papers of the former, if any still exist, have never been identified. A handful of directors erroneously continued to send the devassas to the governor, such that only 18 devassas were found for the period 1776–1795, compared to a total of 167 for 1763–1775.

49. Mauro Cezar, Coelho, “O Diretório dos indios: Possibilìdades de Investigacao,” in Meandros da Historia: Tra-balho e poder no Pará e Maranbào, Sécalos XVIII e XIX, ed. Mauro Cezar, Coelho, et al. (Belém: UNAMAZ, 2005), pp. 66–67.Google Scholar

50. A cabo might be the son or son-in-law of a director, as in the village of Santa Ana de Cajarí (APEP, Cod. 269, Doc. 52), Alter do Chào (APEP, Cod. 442, Doc. 14), or Baiào (APEP, Cod. 354, Doc. 94).

51. Letter from Director Faustino Antonio de Souza to governor and devassa of Cabo Manoel Gonçalves da Silva, Veiros, September 26, 1775, APEP, Cod. 283, Doc. 115. See also devassa of Cabo Angelo de Lemos Correa, Serpa, June 15, 1772, APEP, Cod. 240, Doc. 14. At the end of this devassa, the director appended a note in defense of the cabo, who had been criticized by the crewmen.

52. Devassa of Cabo Antonio Francisco Franco and accompanying certidào {signed by the cabo) of the behavior of Director Antonio Luis de Amorini, Javary, July 1773, APEP, Cod. 258, Doc. 20. See also the letter of Director Francisco Ruberto Pimentel to governor and accompanying certidào (signed by Cabo José Sanches de Brito) of the director’s behavior, Portel, October 13, 1779, APEP, Cod. 346, Doc. 21. There is no devassa appended to this documentation, but the director’s letter describes the content of the testimonies.

53. See, for example, the crew list for the village of Alvarais, which included 20 crewmen with indigenous names among a total crew of 48. Director Joào Pedroso Neves to governor, Alvarais, August 12, 1776, APEP, Cod. 300, Doc. 8,fl. 22.

54. In the rest of the devassas (15 of 36), the success of the expedition was not specified in the sources. Nine feature testimonies critical of the cabo; five feature some that are critical and others that are not; and one features testimonies that give no comment on the cabo’s behavior.

55. Letter from Director Francisco Rodrigues Coelho to governor and devassa of Cabo José Cosme de Brito, Borba, August 24, 1772, APEP, Cod. 240, Doc. 29. For a similar case of the cabo intimidating the crewmen so they will not testify against him, see letter from Director Francisco Coelho da Silva to governor and devassa of Cabo Antonio José da Silva, Pombal, September 28, 1773, APEP, Cod. 263, Doc. 22.

56. Coelho, “O Diretório dos indios,” pp. 66–67.

57. Director José Vicente Pereira to governor, Serzedelo, October 22, 1779, APEP, Cod. 346, Doc. 20.

58. Alexandre Rodrigues, Ferreira, “Diario da Viagem Philosóphica pela Capitanía de Sào José do Rio Negro.” Revista Trimensal do Instituto Histórico e Geográfico Brasileiro 48 (1885), p. 65.Google Scholar

59. On the relatively high density of precontact populations, see Denevan, William M., “A Bluff Model of Riverine Settlement in Prehistoric Amazonia,” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 86:4 (1996), pp. 654–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

60. Usner, Daniel H., “The Frontier Exchange Economy of the Lower Mississippi Valley in the Eighteenth Century,” The William and Mary Quarterly 44:2 (1987), pp. 167–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

61. Brooke, Larson, Cochabamba, 1550–1900: Colonialism and Agrarian Transformation in Bolivia, expanded edition (Durham: Duke University Press, 1998), pp. 351,Google Scholar 353–354, and note 30. See also Saignes, Thierry, “Indian Migration and Social Change in Seventeenth-Century Charcas,” in Ethnicity, Markets, and Migration in the Andes: At the Crossroads of History and Anthropology, ed. Brooke, Larson and Olivia, Harris (Durham: Duke University Press, 1995), pp. 187–189.Google Scholar

62. “Livro Grosso do Maranhào,” in Anais da Biblioteca Nacional (Rio de Janeiro: Divisào de Obras Raras e Pub-licaçôes, 1948), Vols. 67–68, p. 172.

63. Langfur, , The Forbidden Lands, pp. 49–54.Google Scholar

64. Director Luis Gomes de Faria e Souza to governor, Pombal, October 1, 1761, APEP, Cod. 108, Doc. 15.

65. Final decisions on collecting grounds might be made by the director or cabo but were usually worked out in consultation with the Indian officials and crew. On the decision-making process, see Director Lucas José Espinosa de Brito Coelho Folqman to governor, Pombal, August 6, 1770, APEP, Cod. 220, Doc. 7; Director Jesuino Manoel de Gusmào to governor, Ponte de Pedras, February 11, 1772, APEP, Cod. 241, Doc. 33; and Director António José de Freitas to governor, Almeirim, October 12, 1785, APEP, Cod. 424, Doc. 48.

66. See, for example: Devassa of Cabo Fernando Correa, Alenquer, August 29, 1772, APEP, Cod. 240, Doc. 37; devassa of Cabo José Correia de Brito, Silves, September 16, 1775, APEP, Cod. 284, Doc. 45; Director Manoel da Fon-seca Zuzute de Macedo to governor, Outeiro, September 30, 1787, APEP, Cod. 442, Doc. 38; Director Joaquim Francisco Printz to governor, Obidos, May 18, 1781, APEP, Cod. 373, Doc. 47; Director Joào Marcai da Silva to governor, Baiào, May 16,1774, APEP, Cod. 271, Doc. 67; Director Herónimo Pereira da Nóbrega to governor, Arraiolos, August 18, 1773, APEP, Cod. 260, Doc. 32; and Director Domingos Gonçalves Pinto Bello to governor, Serzedelo, January 4, 1781, APEP, Cod. 341, Doc. 46; devassa of Cabo Leandro José, [n/d] 1770, Faro, APEP, Cod. 235, Doc. 26.

67. Director JoSo Euquério Mascarenhas Villa Lobos to governor, Alcnquer, October 26, 1793, APEP, Cod. 470, Doc. 70.

68. Ibid. Another instance of prohibited drinking among crewmen is mentioned in Sommer, “Negotiated Settlements,” p. 281.

69. The collecting expedition of Porto de Moz, for example, stopped in the upriver village of Pombal for the festa of Sào Joào on their way back from collecting Amazonian clove on the Xíngú River (Director Francisco Fernandes de Macedo to governor, Porto de Moz, October 10, 1779, APEP, Cod. 346, Doc. 29).

70. Director Ignacio Cactano de Bcqucman e Albuquerque to governor, Silves, [n/d] 1774, APEP, Cod. 268, Doc. 4.

71. Ibid. For a similar devassa (in which crewmen describe the cabo’s trading and fraternizing in various villages along the Rio Amazonas), see devassa of Cabo José Monteiro Lisboa, Fragoso, August 24, 1764, APEP, Cod. 141, Doc. 54. For directors’ letters that summarize incriminating devassas, see Director Francisco Ruberto Pimentel to governor, Portel, October 13, 1779, APEP, Cod. 346, Doc. 21 (on illicit trading in Serpa and Silves); and Director Joseph Bernardo da Costa e Asso to governor, Serzedelo, July 29, 1773, APEP, Cod. 260, Doc. 16 (on detours to other rivers and illicit trading in Bragança).

72. First and second testimonies in the devassa of Cabo Luis Rodrigues Lima (with reference to interim Cabo Bernardo Fernandes Brazào), Sousel, September 6, 1771, APEP, Cod. 236, Doc. 10. Note: Cabo Brazào had taken over for Souscl’s regular cabo, who fell ill during the expedition. Interestingly, Brazào was one of the delinquent cabos investigated by the high court judge in 1761, and apparently his offenses at the time—illegal trading of turtle lard and cane liquor—had not kept him from assuming what was probably the most desirable cabo post in Pará. Portel was the largest Indian village in the captaincy and consistently sent the greatest number of crewmen into the sertao.

73. On usage of the term gentío in colonial Brazil, see Barickman, , ‘“Tame Indians,’ p. 327,Google Scholar note 6; and Almeida, O Diretório dos îndios, pp. 261–262.

74. Devassa of Cabo Francisco da Silva Chaves, Melgaço, [n/d] 1793, APEP, Cod. 497, Doc. 54.

75. Governor Fernando da Costa de Ataíde Teive to Pedro Maciel Parente, Director of Santarém, Belém, October 3, 1769, AIHGB, Lata 283, Pasta 10. On the tactic of introducing tools to indigenous groups in order to encourage their dependency on these items, see Domingues, Qttando os indios eram vassalos, pp. 143–144.

76. Many documents mention attacks on collecting expeditions that resulted in the loss of life, or at least the loss of the canoe’s cargo and supplies. Sec, for example, Director Francisco Ruberto Pimentel to governor, Portel, September 16,1778, APEP, Cod. 330, Doc. 53; Director José Antonio de Brito to governor, Monte Alegre, November 1, 1793, APEP, Cod. 497, Doc. 51; and Director Pedro Vicente de Oliveira Pantoja to governor, Faro, November 3,1794, APEP, Cod. 470, Doc. 82.

77. The two devassas in which crewmen blame the expedition’s failure on the gentio are: Devassa of Cabo Luis Bahia de Mesquita Monteiro, Sousel, October 17, 1774, APEP, Cod. 268, Doc. 66; and the devassa of an unnamed cabo, Alter do Chào, August 22, 1775, APEP, Cod. 284, Doc. 17.

78. Devassa of Cabo Manoel José, Silves, [n/d] 1774, APEP, Cod. 268, Doc. 4.

79. Devassa of Cabo José da Silva Godinho, Pinhcl, July 21, 1770, APEP, Cod. 220, Doc. 9.

80. Letter from the Director Belchior Henrique Weinholtz to governor, Pinhel, April 18, 1770, APEP, Cod. 215, Doc. 54; and ibid., September 18,1769, APEP, Cod. 202, Doc. 77.

81. Director José Antonio de Brito to governor, Monte Alegre, October 16, 1790, APEP, Cod. 465, Doc. 34. Other examples of resettlements that resulted from contacts made on collecting expeditions can be found in the following APEP documents: Cod. 240, Doc. 40; Cod. 260, Doc. 20; Cod. 268, Doc. 33.

82. Director José Cavalcanti Albuquerque to governor, Vila Franca, June 1, 1792, APEP, Cod. 470, Doc. 43.

83. The following APEP documents describe informal trade with the Mura: Cod. 424, Doc. 44; Cod. 431, Doc. 47; Cod. 435, Doc. 50; Cod. 435, unnumbered doc, fis. 96–100; Cod. 454, Doc. 4.

84. Alexandre Rodrigues Ferreira noted that colonial collecting expeditions had to travel farther and farther afield to find products that once grew close to the settled zones. He also mentioned crown efforts to preserve over-exploited plants, such as a 1688 edict prohibiting the collection of cravo on the Tocantins and Capim Rivers (“Diàrio da Viagem Philosóphica,” pp. 72–73).

85. Governor Francisco de Souza Coutinho reversed the 1769 order forbidding communication and trade with the independent Indians in his carta circular of 1 September 1790, APEP, Cod. 466, Doc. 30.

86. Director Venuslào José de Souza Moraes to governor, Boim, September 12, 1775, APEP, Cod. 284, Doc. 44.

87. Cabo Bernardo Fernandes Brazào to Director Antonio Gonçalves de Souza, Vila Franca, [n/d] 1777, APEP, Cod. 317, unnumbered doc, fi. 114.

88. Ibid. For other reports of crews that received collecting tips and assistance from independent Indian groups, see Director Boaventura de Cunha Caldeira to governor, Arraiolos, August 23, 1792, APEP, Cod. 447, Doc. 40; and Director Francisco Coelho de Mesquita to governor, Alter do Chao, September 18, 1774, APEP, Cod. 268, Doc. 28 (this last document is cited in Sommer, “Negotiated Settlements,” p. 103).

89. As one of the anonymous reviewers of this article pointed out, relationships between fugitive and colonial communities were complex, ranging from mutual hostility to collaboration, depending on the context. See Schwartz, Stuart B. and Hal, Langfur, “Tapanhuns, Negros da Terra, and Curibocar. Common Cause and Confrontation between Blacks and Natives in Colonial Brazil,” in Beyond Black and Red: African-Native Relations in Colonial Latin America, ed. Restali, Matthew (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2005), pp. 81–114;Google Scholar and more specifically on the Amazon, Flavio dos, Santos Gomes, “A ‘Safe Haven’: Runaway Slaves, Mocambos, and Borders in Colonial Amazonia, Brazil,” Hispanic American Historical Review 82:3 (2002), pp. 469–498.Google Scholar

90. Director Francisco Ruberto Pimentel to governor, Portel, October 13, 1779, APEP, Cod. 346, Doc. 21.

91. Director Francisco Rodrigues Coelho to governor, Serzedelo, August 23, 1793, APEP, Cod. 497, unnumbered doc, fis. 59–61.

92. Anderson, , Colonization as Exploitation, pp. 30,Google Scholar 34–35.

93. Almeida, , “Os VassaJos d’el Rey,” p. 72.Google Scholar

94. Authors who emphasize the coercive aspects of the expeditions are listed in note 35. The primary exceptions, as already noted above, are the recent studies by Coelho and Sommer. The latter author mentions several examples of Indians demanding payment for services rendered to crown or village officials, including one case in which crewmen refused to go collecting for the native headmen because they did not expect to receive their salaries (“Negotiated Settlements,” pp. 134–135; see also Coelho, , “Do sertao para o mar,” p. 281).Google Scholar

95. For reflections on how to interpret the varied responses of Andean Indians to European market expansion, see Stern, Steve J., “The Variety and Ambiguity of Native Andean Intervention in European Colonial Markets,” in Ethnicity, Markets, and Migration in the Andes: At the Crossroads of History and Anthropology, ed. Brooke, Larson and Harris, Olivia (Durham: Duke University Press, 1995), pp. 73–100.Google Scholar in For a case study that argues for the voluntary nature of native participation in colonial credit institutions (the repartimiento de comercio) in Oaxaca, Mexico, see Jeremy, Baskes, “Coerced or Voluntary? The Repartimiento and Market Participation of Peasants in Late Colonial Oaxaca,” Journal of Latin American Studies 28:1 (1996), pp. 1–28.Google Scholar For a critique of Baskes and an attempt to reframe the question, see Kevin, Gosner, “Indigenous Production and Consumption of Cotton in Eighteenth-Century Chiapas: Re-Evaluating the Coercive Prac-tices of the Reparto de Efectos,” in New World, First Nations: Native Peoples of Mesoamerica and the Andes under Colonial Rule, ed. Patrick Cahill, David and Tovías, Blanca (Brighton: Sussex Academic Press, 2006), pp. 129–143.Google Scholar

96. Intendente Joào de Amorini Pereira to the Secretario de Estado do Negocios do Reino c Mercês, Belém, December 31, 1777, AHU, Pará Avulsos, Cod. 78, Doc. 6508.

97. Stern, , “The Variety and Ambiguity of Native Andean Intervention,” p. 90.Google Scholar

98. Crewmen also disputed the division of profits amongst themselves. In one case, a “major, unpleasant controversy” erupted among the crewmen of Santa Ana de Cajarí over the fact that, out of the twenty Indians who had gone on the expedition, sixteen had worked for the native officials (on fixed salaries) and only four had worked for themselves (for profit shares). The director said he did not even dare to draw up a crew list indicating such designations, as this would only inflame the crewmen further (Director Segismundo de Costa Pimentel to governor, Santa Ana de Cajarí, August 1, 1777, APEP, Cod. 312, Doc. 1).

99. Director Diogo Luis de Rebello de Barros e Vasconcelos to governor, Tabatinga/Javary, [n/d] July 1778, APEP, Cod. 329, Doc. 25; Director Sebastiào da Rocha to governor, Serzedelo, July 26, 1778, APEP, Cod. 329, Doc. 24; and also see the example in Sommer, “Negotiated Settlements,” pp. 134-135. Desirable payments-in-kind were even more difficult to come by in the Rio Negro captaincy. The governor of that captaincy lamented that if the shortages of European goods were only for the current year, he could more easily reassure the Indians that goods would be forthcoming, “but since there is a shortage every year in this or that type of product, it is more difficult to cominee them that it is due to no ships arriving from Portugal.” Governor Joaquim de Mello e Póvoas to the governor of Pará, Barcelos, February 17, 1760, APEP, Cod. 96, Doc. 46. Various product “wish lists” of Indian officials from the Rio Negro villages can be found in APEP, Cod. 96, Docs. 15, 18, and 21.

100. Director Joseph Bernardo da Costa e Asso to governor, Serzedelo, May 3, 1773, APEP, Cod. 257, Doc. 69.

101. Devassa of Cabo Caetano José Marreiros, Santa Anna do Maracapucu, August 4, 1765, APEP, Cod. 157, Doc. 10; Director Manoel Moura e Castro to governor, Pombal, June 30, 1761, APEP, Cod. 106, Doc. 88.

102. Governor Bernardo de Mello e Castro to Francisco Xavier de Mcndonça Furtado, Belém, August 9, 1759, BNRJ, Cod. 11, 2, 043, fis 42r-43r.

103. Desembargador Luís Gomes de Faria e Souza to the Secretario de Estado da Marinha e Ultramar, Francisco Xavier de Mcndonça Furtado, Belém, November 20, 1761, AHU, Pará Avulsos, Cod. 51, D. 4698. See also Article 42 of the Diretório (Beozzo, Lets e Regimentos).

104. As characterized by Governor Francisco de Souza Coutinho in a letter to Martinho de Mello e Castro, Belém, September 23, 1790 (AIHGB, Lata 284, Livro 2, Doc. 29).

105. Antonio, , Gonçalves Días, Diccionario da lingua tttpy: chamada linguageral dos indígenas do Brazil (Lisbon: F.A. Brockhaus, 1858), p. 148.Google Scholar The entry “potaba” includes the following définitions: dádiva (gift or donation), mimo (gift), oferta (offering or gift), parte (part), quinhdo (portion or share), and raçâo (ration). The term can also be used to refer to esmolas (alms) or dtzimos (tithes).

106. Director Venuslào José de Souza Moraes to govenor, Boim, [n/d] 1777, APEP, Cod. 317, Doc. 12. Although he did not use the term potaba, the Jesuit Joao Daniel described a very similar system during the pre-Direc-torate era, in which the missionaries conceded to Indian crewmen any fragment of Amazonian clove that was irregularly sized for bundling with the rest of the cargo; the cabos then traded cane liquor or other trinkets for these portions, which sometimes added up to 10, 12, or more arrobas (Daniel, Tesouro Descoberto, vol. 2, p. 93).

107. There are very few references to potabas’m the historiography, and further research is needed on the practice. Barbara Sommer recounts how visiting officiais received “potava” of food and livestock, and she notes that one of these officials, Bishop Queiroz, “specified that it was customary to pay double the value of the gifts, which is what he did. . . . This exchange perpetuated the indigenous value placed on reciprocity and paying double may have be [sic] calculated to show the bishop’s authority, as generosity would have been expected from him” (“Negotiated Settlements,” p. 135). Sweet similarly defines “pittava” as a “‘gift’ of food offered by village women to passing canoe expeditions, in ritual exchange for trade goods” (“A Rich Realm,” p. 816), which is exactly how they appear in the correspondence of Governor Francisco Xavier de Mendonça Furtado. During his 1754 trip from Belém to the Rio Negro, the governor received “putavas,” or “customary presents,” from Indian women in each of the villages along the way, usually consisting of great quantities of bananas, which he “paid for” in ribbons, cotton cloth, and salt (“Diàrio da Viagem” in Marcos Carnciro de Mcndonça, ed., A Amazonia na era pombalina: Correspondencia inèdita do Governador e Capitào-General do Estado do Grao-Pará e Maranhao, Francisco Xavier de Mendonça Furtado, 1751Ί759 [Rio de Janeiro: Instituto Histórico e Geográfico Brasileiro, 1963] vol. 2, pp. 256–288). With reference to a different colonial captaincy (Ceará), Ricardo Pinto de Medeiros cites a case in which native headmen required Indians to pay them potabas of a half pataca (a type of colonial coinage) when they went to work as cowhands in the interior (“Política indigenista do período pombalino e seus reflexos ñas capitanías do norte da América portuguesa,” in Actas do Congresso Internacional o Espaço Atlántico deAntigo Regime: poderes e sociedades [Lisboa: Instituto Camoes], 2008. ν. 1, p. 15). I am grateful to one of the anonymous reviewers for suggesting this last reference and for drawing my attention to the ambiguities around the term.

108. Devassa of Cabo Antonio José da Silva, Pombal, September 28, 1773, APEP, Cod. 263, Doc. 22.

109. Devassa of Cabo Pascoal Lopez and letter from Director Fernando Scrrao de Oliveira to governor, Almeirim, September 23, 1765, APEP, Cod. 157, Doc. 65.

110. See, for example, Director Joaquim Francisco Printz to governor, Obidos, May 18, 1781, APEP, Cod. 373, Doc. 47; Director Herónimo Pereira da Nóbrega to governor, Arraiolos, August 18, 1773, APEP, Cod. 260, Doc. 32; and Director Pedro Vicente de Oliveira Pantoja to governor, Faro, September 18, 1791, APEP, Cod. 465, Doc. 101.

111. Ferreira, , “Diàrio da Viagem Philosóphica,” p. 73,Google Scholar where he also discusses the effects of unsustainable collecting practices on cacao and cravo.

112. See, for example, the story of a pilot who tried to kill his cabo after being reprimanded for not collecting enough: Director Bento José do Rego to governor, Olivença, August 1, 1765, APEP, Cod. 157, Doc. 4. On cabos who were stingy with collective supplies, see: devassa of Cabo Joaquim José de Acençao, Serzedelo and Piriá, July 29, 1773, APEP, Cod. 260, Doc. 16; devassa of Cabo José da Silva Godinho, Pinhel, July 27, 1771, APEP, Cod. 234, Doc. 44; devassa of Cabo Isidoro dos Santos Portugal, Lamalonga, July 22, 1770, APEP, Cod. 217, unnumbered doc. Sommer also cites a case in which a cabo was killed by the crewmen after threatening to punish them for breaking one of his bottles of liquor (“Negotiated Settlements,” p. 281).

113. Devassa of Cabo Joào Rodrigues Uzarte, Almeirim, September 3, 1763, APEP, Cod. 131, Doc. 7/8. On Indians’ preference for collecting cacao over sarsaparilla or cravo, see Daniel, , Tesouro Descobcrto, vol. 2, pp. 85–86;Google Scholar on p. 83, he also describes their fondness for collecting (and eating) turtle eggs.

114. Devassa of Cabo Joaquim José de Acençao, Serzedelo/Piriá, July 29, 1773, APEP, Cod. 260, Doc. 16.

115. For example, the 70-year-old Alfonso de Paiva provided one of the testimonies in the devassa of the Cabo of Alter do Chào, August 22, 1775, APEP, Cod. 284, Doc. 17.

116. Cabo Pedro de Figueiredo de Vasconcelos, Tajoperu, February 8, 1766, APEP, Cod. 167, Doc. 39.

117. Director Joseph Bernardo da Costa e Asso to governor, Serzedelo, July 29, 1773, APEP, Cod. 260, Doc. 16.

118. Stern, , “The Variety and Ambiguity of Native Andean Intervention,” pp. 84,Google Scholar 90.

119. On similar strategies in the colonial Andean context, see the overview provided by Brooke, Larson, “Andean Communities, Political Cultures, and Markets: The Changing Contours of a Field,” in Ethnicity, Markets, and Migration, pp. 21–22,Google Scholar as well as the case studies in the rest of the volume.