Argentina

Descriptions about aboriginal populations that inhabited Argentina began in the 16th century, a few decades after the European conquest. However, it was during the 19th century that travellers and explorers, most of them of European origin, carried out more systematic studies. In the second half of the 19th century, when the Argentine state was not yet consolidated, the government looked to define its political frontiers by expanding its economic control over vast territories, as well as over aboriginal populations (Podgorny 1999, 2008; Podgorny and Lopes 2008). For this reason, the Argentine State organized military and scientific missions in order to increase the knowledge about its geography and human populations (Podgorny 1999, 2008; Podgorny and Lopes 2008; Farro 2009). The war against these aborigines, known as La Conquista del Desierto (‘The Conquest of the Desert’), began in 1879 and resulted in thousands of native people being killed or captured. Around this time, the Academia de Ciencias de Córdoba (Academy of Sciences of Córdoba),

and Sociedad Científica Argentina (Argentine Scientific Society) were established, as well as the first museums with a positivist philosophical approach, for example the Museo de La Plata (Museum of La Plata) and the Museo Etnográfico Juan Bautista Ambrosetti (Juan Bautista Ambrosetti Ethnographic Museum). These museums served to consolidate anthropological activities (Carnese et al. 1992) and to house and expose natural and cultural objects recovered in scientific missions carried out by the Argentine government during the military campaigns (Podgorny 2008). Private exhibitions and museums, established some years later, also contributed to the increase in knowledge about American Indians (Podgorny and Lopes 2008). All material recovered during previous years was organized as scientific collections that have

been, until the present day, invaluable material for research. The majority of the collections belonged to native people from all over the Argentine territory. They increased in quantity over the years through different ways of acquisition, although the curation of some of these today may be regarded as non-ethical or questionable. For instance, those institutions also promoted the organizing of new missions, the buying and exchange of objects from private collectors or from other foreign institutions (e.g., from Brussels and Paris), in order to increase the diversity of their collections (Farro 2009). Several private collections were also donated

(Podgorny 2008). During ‘The Conquest of the Desert’, some people who accompanied the army kept the skulls of aborigines killed during the battles and even robbed the remains and grave goods of some Indians chiefs, such as those of Mariano Rosas, Chipitruz, Gherenal and Callfucura (Zeballos 1960). The skull was the only anatomical part exhumed during these military expeditions, and was later donated to the Museo de La Plata (Lehmann-Nitsche 1910). The Museo de La Plata, under the direction of Francisco P. Moreno, also held some people captured in ‘The Conquest of the Desert’. The chiefs of some Patagonian populations, such as Inakayal, Sayeweke and Foyel, as well as their relatives, lived in this institution between 1885 and 1895 (Farro 2009). Some of them died in the museum, whereas others were returned to Patagonia. After their death, many anatomical parts, especially the brain and the skeleton, were incorporated into anthropological collections (Lehmann-Nitsche 1910). Following the establishment of the first scientific institutions, further institutionalization of

physical anthropology arose when the first courses were introduced. The first course in Anthropology was run by a German-born scientist, Professor Robert Lehmann-Nitsche, at the Universidad de Buenos Aires (University of Buenos Aires) in 1903 (Podgorny 2006). In 1905 and 1906, the first professorships were set up at the Universidad de Buenos Aires and the Universidad de La Plata, respectively, both organized by Lehmann-Nitsche. The first degrees in anthropology were established at these universities at the end of the 1950s (Carnese et al. 1992). According to Carnese et al. (1992: 36), it was during the second half of the 19th century that

biological anthropology began in Argentina as a separate discipline, independent from other natural sciences. Carnese et al. (1992) have divided the history of the discipline into three periods, according to the principal ideas that dominated the investigations. Between 1860 and 1920 studies were carried out by Argentine and foreign researchers and focused on human origins and descriptions of South American aborigines (Carnese et al. 1992; Marcellino 2002; Carnese and Pucciarelli 2007). The publication of anthropometric measurements had been a common activity since 1874 with Francisco Moreno, an Argentine explorer and naturalist (Podgorny 2006). The French school of anthropology, with the studies of Paul Broca, was influential. During this period, Darwinist theory was adopted and evolutionism gradually replaced creationist and catastrophist paradigms (Carnese et al. 1992). Florentino Ameghino made important contributions to anthropology and palaeontology, despite the fact that his theory about human origins in the Argentine Pampas was based on invalid evidence. The period between 1920 and 1960 was dominated by diffusionist and typological paradigms

(Carnese et al. 1992). Most studies consisted of skeletal descriptions, lacking in evolutionary explanation. When genetic studies developed, serological indicators were also incorporated into these ‘catalogues’ of human variation (Carnese et al. 1992; Carnese and Pucciarelli 2007). Since 1960, biological anthropology has incorporated concepts derived from neo-Darwinism

and molecular biology (Carnese and Pucciarelli 2007). Studies have focused on several issues, such as micro-evolutionary mechanisms, adaptation, environmental influences on growth and development of past and present populations, bioarchaeology, epidemiology and genetics, among others. Anthropological studies have been published for more than a century; however, it was not

until the end of the 1980s that a group of physical anthropologists from the Universidad de Buenos Aires, Universidad de La Plata, Universidad de Río Cuarto (University of Buenos Aires, University of La Plata and University of Río Cuarto), among others, started to meet together with the objective of unifying teaching methods and to exchange knowledge about their particular areas of study. Following on from these meetings, the First National Meeting of Biological Anthropology was organized in September 1993 at the Museo de La Plata. As a result of the success of this meeting, with more than 100 participants and 40 papers presented, it was

decided to create the Asociación Argentina de Antropología Biológica or AABA (Association of Biological Anthropology of Argentina). In addition, it was decided to create a body that would document the home-grown scientific production, and thus the Revista Argentina de Antropología Biológica, or RAAB (Argentinean Journal of Biological Anthropology) was established. Since 1996, meetings of the AABA have been organized bi-annually and the RAAB is published annually and recently indexed in Latindex. More information can be found on the website of the Argentine Association of Biological Anthropology (www.fcnym.unlp.edu.ar/aabra/). Biological anthropology has also been central in forensic science, mainly forensic anthro-

pology and archaeology. In 1984 the Equipo Argentino de Antropología Forense, or EAAF (Argentine Forensic Anthropology Team) was created in order to investigate human rights violations in Argentina during the military government that ruled from 1976 to 1983. The EAAF is a non-governmental, non-profit making, scientific organization that conducts forensic investigations in Argentina and, since 1986, in around 30 countries throughout America, Asia, Africa and Europe. More information can be found on their website (www.eaaf.org/: EAAF 2009).