Talk:Mapuche

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks:

Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks:

Meta-tasks:
- Place the {{Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project.
- Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups
Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution:
Start an article:
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests

Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

Chile Top‑importance

	Chile portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chile, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Chile on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChileWikipedia:WikiProject ChileTemplate:WikiProject ChileChile articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Indigenous peoples of the Americas Low‑importance

	Indigenous peoples of the Americas portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the Americas, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indigenous peoples of the Americas on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of the AmericasWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the AmericasTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the AmericasIndigenous peoples of the Americas articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Argentina Mid‑importance

	Argentina portal This article is part of WikiProject Argentina, an attempt to expand, improve and standardise the content and structure of articles related to Culture of Argentina. If you would like to participate, you can improve Mapuche, or sign up and contribute to a wider array of articles like those on our to do list.ArgentinaWikipedia:WikiProject ArgentinaTemplate:WikiProject ArgentinaArgentine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Page views for this article over the last 30 days

Detailed traffic statistics

References

Is there any way there can be a non Ward Churchill reference for this? As he has been shown to have quite a bit of misconduct in his research and writing it might be better to have a more reliable source?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.127.72.180 (talk • contribs)

map

Can somebody replace the map that has been deleted? Jclerman 14:11, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

picture

I don't think the main picture is appropiate. It is a good picture, and the traditional clothing is a plus, but the girl is probably a mestiza. At the risk of seeming racist, as this is the article for the mapuche people, i think the picture should be more representative of their race. I've been looking for a new one, but most i've found are copyrighted. Any help/opinions would be much appretiated. Gerardo199 04:29, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I rather like the picture myself: it's better than an historical picture in that it shows the Mapuche as a living people. With respect, I don't think the concept of mestizo/a is particularly relevant to Chile, although any Chilean would instantly identify her as 'indígena'. The article should have several more pictures of course. There are various images on the Spanish and German pages which could be useful. GdlR 19:20, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who said that Mapuche are related with Diaguitas?

I have never heard that before, in fact the mapudungun us cosidered a language isolate. Dentren | ^Talk 20:25, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That idea is unverifiable, as we don't know what language the Diaguitas spoke. One thing is certain: they didn't call themselves "diaguitas", and didn't spoke "Kakán". Ricardo Latcham introduces the term "chilean diaguitas" and has become widspread to describe the people(s) that once inhabited the semiarid north. As he supposed that these chilean diaguitas were related to the argentinean diaguitas, suypposed that they spoke the same language, called "kakan". Nowadays, nobody supports this view, but the name has remained, as there's nothing better.DaniloVilicic 01:09, 5 October 2007 (UTC)DaniloVilicic[reply]

"related groups" info removed from infobox

For dedicated editors of this page: The "Related Groups" info was removed from all {{Infobox Ethnic group}} infoboxes. Comments may be left on the Ethnic groups talk page. Ling.Nut 20:32, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Intro

This paragraph doesn't make much sense: They can be divided into the Picunche who lived in the central valleys of Chile — these integrated with the Inca Empire and later with the Spaniards. The Mapuche inhabited the valleys between the Itata and Toltén Rivers, as well as the Huilliche, the Lafkenche, and the Pehuenche. The northern Aonikenk, called Patagons by Ferdinand Magellan, were an ethnic group of the pampa regions that made contact with some Mapuche groups, adopting their language and some culture (in what came to called the Araucanization); they are the Tehuelche.

Apparently somebody edited and mixed up everything. I can't fix it, as I don't know the geographical distribution. 128.138.107.168 03:33, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have now tried to correct the confusion. As I see it there are 2 confusing thing: 1) The Central Valley of Chile is an ambigous term because it can be used to refer to the long Valley formed by the Andes and the Chilean coast range or it can also refer to the heartland of Chile including al Chile beetwen Aconcagua River and Bio-Bio river. The picunches lived rougtly in the second area I described. 2) The term mapuche can eityher refer to All indigenous groups speaking Mapudungun including huilliches and Picunches (sometimes the groups living in Patagonia are excluded from this definitiuon) or it can refer the just the mapuches living rougtly in what is now Araucanía Region of Chile. Dentren | ^Talk 02:15, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to explain with my unskills on English :P:

As it was said by Dentren, "Mapuche" are all indigenous people that spoke Mapudungun. They can be divided in 4 or more subdivisions:

Picunche (<pikumche = people of north) were the people living between Aconcagua Valley and Biobio River, dominated by Incas. They dissapeared by aculturation, diseases and mestization with Conquistadores.
Mapuche (<mapuche = people of the land) in a narrow sense are the historic "Araucanians", inhabitants of a zone between Itata and Toltén River. They made war to Spaniards and remainded free across all Colonial Period and only were conquered in 1882 after an invassion of Chilean Army.
Huilliche (<williche = people of south) dwelled between Toltén River and northern zone of Chiloe Island. Furthermore, they moved to south and actually live even in the southern part of Chiloé.
Tehuelche (<chewelche = fierce people) are the "Mapuchized" Aonikenk since 17th and 18th centuries.
Lafkenche (lafkenche = people of sea) are the inhabitants of coastal zone (Mapuche or Huilliche, but in relationship with sea activities).
Pehuenche (<pewenche = people of piñon [seed of monkeypuzzle tree]) inhabits mountain valleys of Araucania and Biobio regions. In ancient times, they weren't Mapuches, and only in 17th century began the mix-process.
Nagche and wenteche are the Mapuche (narrow sense) that live in low and highland respectively.

All this names are given from Mapuche (n.s) point of view. All the groups call themselves "Mapu[n]che" or "Mapuche-Huilliche", "Mapuche-Pehuenche", etc. There are many sources (in Spanish) for a review of this words. Bye. Lin linao 05:27, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your explanation is good, I would only like to add that lafkenches may refer to any mapuche group living close to the sea or lake (Calafquén Lake), but is usualy aplyed to "Mapuches-Araucanians". Another group that can be considered in the Mapuche family are the Cuncos that inhabited parts of Chiloe island. The huilliches also inhabited Chiloe island and as far as I know the relation between these two groups are not clear. There are also other Mapuche related groups or tribes in the Andes and east of it such as the Voliches. Dentren | ^Talk 15:56, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Cunco" is an curious name. It had been used for people of Mapuche culture around Chacao Channel, for Huilliches of the Llanos (Osorno), as known in Spanish as "Junco" (a approach to English: Khunkoh). Sources disagree about the use of this term and I don't understand well the arguments in support or against their use. In Argentinian Pampas arise another peoples of mixed origins: Ranqueles (<rankülche = people from reeds) and Pampas, both of them with Het? ancestry. Calfucurá commanded a federation of them in 1840's. Puelches (<pwelche = people of East) seem Mapuche related too, but is needed more references. Bye. Lin linao 23:47, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually Het is a "ghost" language group, proposed by R. Lehman-Nitsche from a few proper names. Actually nobody accepts het a valid language or people. Ranqueles and pampas are better considered "Gününa Küne" or Northern Tehuelche groups, araucanized.DaniloVilicic 02:16, 1 October 2007 (UTC)DaniloVilicic[reply]

Yeah, I'm working about in es:Lenguas chon. Can you add some info in Chon languages. Bye. Lin linao 08:21, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do it, as soon as I get rid of my "obligations" at the university. Maybe next week.DaniloVilicic 01:10, 5 October 2007 (UTC)DaniloVilicic[reply]

Metal working

They quickly adopted metal-working and horseback-riding from the Europeans, along with the cultivation of wheat and sheep.

This passage is not archaeologically accurate. There is the widespread idea that metal working is not present in the area before the spanish conquest, but there is a somehow longstanding tradition of copper-working in the zone according to archaeological data. Specially for ornamental artifacts, and this is the origin of the later silver working (the ear rings mantain their shape but become to be worked on silver instead of copper)- DaniloVilicic —Preceding unsigned comment added by DaniloVilicic (talk • contribs) 01:48, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are a lot of new evidence that suggest that the mapuches had a far more "advanced" culture than thought, for example the discovery of some proto pyramids near Purén. But this article needs sources for such statements like proto-pyramids and early copper working. Dentren | ^Talk 08:21, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have sources for copper working, I will add them soon, but the problem I have is that I need to refer to archaeological cultures that are not named "mapuche" that it's an ethnological term. These AC do not correspond to the modern mapuche territory or culture necesarily, but they are indeed their ancestors. There are very different archaeological sequences for Central Chile and for Southern Chile, even if they spoke the same language when the spaniards arrived. Some have proposed that mapudungun was a kind of pidgin used for all these people from Aconcagua river to Chiloé (about 1.000 km). Copper working is attested for "El Vergel cultural complex" (1.000 to 1.500 A.D. aproximately).DaniloVilicic 06:55, 2 October 2007 (UTC)DaniloVilicic[reply]

Thom Dillehay has suggested that "cuels" (mound) were some kind of protopyramids, but this interpretation remains controversial. The kuel is certainly a kind of funerary mound, with territorial and symbolic importance for these groups. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DaniloVilicic (talk • contribs) 07:00, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is kwel a Mapuche word?. Lin linao 16:59, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is, at least it appears in Thom Dillehay's articles as a mapuche word. I'm not sure if it is [ku.el] or [kwel]. You can see this: http://www.ifeanet.org/biblioteca/fiche.php?codigo=REV00006027 if available at your library. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DaniloVilicic (talk • contribs) 19:58, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Horse trade across the Andes

Í have readed a history book (Barridos por el viento) about Patagonia were it it said that there was an extensive horse traffic from the Pampas were horses were stolen during raids and then later moved to the lands naer Nuehuel Huapi lake were they went throug a mountain pass (possibly Mamuil Malal Pass) into Chile. Who knows about this? I would be interesting to have it included in the article. People may think that the Mapuches were "sleeping" or doing nothing between the last big upprising in 1650 (Arauco War) and the occupation of the Araucanía. They were actualy expanding their influnece and culture to the Pampas and dealing with horse trade! Dentren | ^Talk 10:02, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

a personal opinion...

Hey, I personally find it very hard that the Mapuche were the only indigenous group(outside of isolated groups in Brazilian rainforest etc.) to not have been dominated by colonial empires...and then the Chileans had to go and invade..?why? Chile was created in the proud years of Simon Bolivar's indepence struggle, the Mapuche epitomised it... hmm, I guess history is history, what happened happened...I hope though that the Mapuche can restore at least some of that strongly indepedent heritage.... DomDomsta333 (talk) 12:33, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are surely other groups indigenous group(outside of isolated groups in Brazilian rainforest etc.) in south america that were not dominated by colonial empires, but the prolongued Arauco War makes the Mapuches probably the most expensive "indian war" in the Americas. See es:Real Situado. Dentren | ^Talk 15:14, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Incas" and mapuches

The caption to the Huaman Poma de Ayala illustration refers to fighting betwen "incas" and mapuches. But mapuche is the name of a nation, while inca is the name of a ruler extended to a ruling caste. It can be taken for certain that there were no "inca" men fighting the mapuche men, but troops at the service of that empire. Suggestion: change "inca" for something like "troops of the Inca empire". --Lupo Manaro 12:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Inca" were "citizens of Inca Empire" too. Lin linao (talk) 22:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just like Romans iof the Roman Empire were not only those from the city of Rome. Dentren | ^Talk 11:04, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mapuches VS Incas, wrong side

To me its obvious that the Mapuches are to the left, and the Incas to the right, i will change it now. You can check the Spanish version if you want, they have the same picture, and "izquierda" means "right". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Calarca (talk • contribs) 22:31, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I bet US$1.000.000 that izquierza is left. Dentren | ^Talk 13:05, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I bet US$2,000,000 for "izquierda"="left" :). However, you're right: Incas are in right side of the picture. Lin linao (talk) 16:30, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greeks and other Wild Theories

Far out, highly speculative theories and references in Greek to someone no one ever heard of don't belong. Maybe....maybe, if the source can be found in English translation, a separate section for wild theories might be added, but this is an encyclopedia, so the main body of the text ought to reflect reasonable, substantiated, and more or less authoritative sources. Tmangray (talk) 20:50, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you add at this article the speech of Lonko Kilapan, where he claims that the Araucanian people have greek origin and explains the reasons? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.203.53.233 (talk) 00:57, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Both the Greeks and Croats are sizable ethnic communities in Chile to have arrived as fishermen and shepherds, mainly in the 19th and 20th centuries by invitation of the Chilean government settlement program. To theorize Greeks as well the Croatians were cofounders of the Mapuche people before or during the Spanish colonial period is only a mythological fable. It will be impossible for pre-modern Greek navigators to sail out the Mediterannean Sea to the Atlantic all the way down to the tip of South America, unless the navigational skills associated with Greeks have been successful to led them to establish a new distant colony a long time ago. + 71.102.12.55 (talk) 07:05, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Polynesian origin?

The striking similarities between the Mapuche and Polynesians of the South Pacific are somewhat uncanny, but evident in the nature of the peoples' physiology, culture, religion and myths of a land across the ocean. For example, the Rapa Nui of Easter Island which is also a Chilean territory 2000 miles off the mainland of South America, described a land Hiva or "Land of the Birds/Gulls" in the Rapa Nui language, was located to the east and by scientific analysis, the Rapa Nui were able to use wooden canoes to travel by usage of ocean currents all the way to South America.

Back in the 1940's, Norwegian anthropologist Thor Heyerdahl speculated that the Polynesians were ethnolinguistic cousins of the Inca of Peru and racially American Indian. He even tested a grass reed boat Kon-tiki that sailed across the South Pacific all the way to Tahiti 3400 miles away. Despite the adventurous success of the Kon-tiki, mainstream anthropology debunked Heyderahl's theory of a Polynesian-Amerindian race. Also the routes of ocean currents in the South Pacific was inable to take pre-modern South American Indians' grass reed boats to any Polynesian islands.

And the Mapuche have some possible connection with the American Aborigine race that lived from 50000-15000 BCE, the Mapuche in physiology would resemble, but do not have close genetic relations with the Patagonian giants of the nearby regions of Patagonia and Tierra del Fuego. The Yaghan peoples, also known as the Ona and Selknam were forced into extinction in the late 19th/early 20th century. For the Patagonians to migrated all the way west from Australia and New Guinea through the South Pacific, not the scientifically accepted path north through Siberia and North America or Panama, the Mapuche cannot possibly be an Australoid-Polynesian race. + 71.102.12.55 (talk) 04:10, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

recent land dispute translation?

Some good-looking info at es:Mapuches#El_conflicto_forestal_y_el_papel_del_Estado_de_Chile. ¦ Reisio (talk) 02:49, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Araucanization of Pehuenche people

Hi. Formerly, Pehuenche people weren't Mapuche. They were Araucanizated during 17th-18th Centuries. 'Old Pehuenches' were related to [Old] Puelches and another mountain people; they didn't speak Mapudungun and were fully nomads. A reference-in Spanish- may founded here, you can read the paragraph that start with La distancia etnológica.... In this article there is a sentence about aculturation by Mapuches. Bye. Lin linao (talk) 07:03, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Today I have learned something new. Good links.. There is a lot of information about the battles of the Arauco War but nothing about the Pehuenches and their trade and influence on the Argentine pampa. Maybe you would like to collaborate to expand the Pehuenche and Araucanization articles.Dentren | ^Talk 15:18, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I don't dare (?) because I have little confidence about my English. However, I can add information and references in es:Pehuenche for further translation. Bye. Lin linao (talk) 07:48, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some comments 01

Best wishes. Congratulatioons for your good work. Just some comments. First, the pronunction of the word Mapuche or Mapuce (according to Raguileo alphabet now in use) is close to Mah-poo-tcheh in English. Second, rag-ko is translated as "clayed water" or "water with mud" from mapudungu(n) (I don't know what "clayey water" means). Third, if you're using the Spanish words for "lonko" and "toqui", then you should write "lonco" and add that it comes from the mapudungu(n) term "longko". Fourth, the fourth paragraph of this article is confusing and not well written, I think. Note that "Patagons" were called by this name by Antonio Pigafetta and not by Magellan, and that today they're not called Tehuelches anymore, but Aonikenk or Günuna-küna (formerly "southern" and "northern" Tehuelches). The theories of the "Penutian link" of mapudungu(n) are really old and not considered as likely anymore. Right now, most linguists consider it an isolated language. Even if I see as a good thing to include all the opinions, all of them should be included, and also the year they were formulated (I think the "Penutian" one is really old). More soon... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.43.208.101 (talk) 18:39, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some comments 02

More comments. For current Mapuche situation you can check Indymedia, specially the Spanish version, in order to get fresh news. There are a real lot. And a disturbing point is to see a new as the included in the "Myth and religion" section, concerning human sacrifice. I've worked for years with Mapuche people, I've read a lot of books and documents and never found any mention to such sacrifices. You should include this kind of things as a new (a link, maybe?) if you want, and include in this section more cultural traits, as the huge Mapuche mythology or the Ngillatun-Machitun-Kamarikun ceremonies. Yopu can aslo review, in other sections, the Mapuche musical instruments and rhythms, their current literature and poetry in mapudungu(n) (Elicura Chihuailaf, for example), the different alphabets used by Mapudungu(n), the influence of mapudungu(n) in the Argentiean and Chilean Spanish language, their traditional sports (like pali or chueca), their folkdances (like choike-purrun) and songs, and so on... Any person with no idea about the Mapuche people can have, after reading the above mentioned section, the old belief that Mapuche are "savages". You can also add links to the fabulous pdf-documents about Mapuche art, crafts and oral tradition of the digital library of the Chilean Museum of Precolumbian Art. They're really great. And you can find a lot of modern images of Mapuche people free in the web, in order to provide a "modern" look to this page. If help is needed, I'd be more than glad... My best wishes. More soon... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.43.208.101 (talk) 18:53, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some comments 03

About the occupation of the "Araucanian" lands by modern states in South America, the Argentinean "War of the Desert" has not been included. No mention either to the horse-trade across the Andean range, and the "malones" in the Argentinean pampa, and all the literature that these "malones" ("indian attacks") originated, as famous "Martin Fierro" poem. And the map included as a graphic for current Mapuche territories is totally inaccurate: in Argentina, they occupy a larger (really larger) extension of land. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.43.208.101 (talk) 19:02, 4 May 2009 (UTC) Ahh anmother non-Mapuche who knows nothing about Mapuche culture. Can you tell me what the name Namuncura means? What about Tehuelche? The same people theorizing that each territorial identity are "a different group" Its like saying the Dene and Navaho are 2 different nations. They are the same people. — Marimanque— — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marimanque (talk • contribs) 17:45, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In spite of keeping poor form, the initial commenter makes a valid point. The photo of Ceferino Namuncurá should be removed as he was a Tehuelche, see following from the file of the Argentine Senate: http://www.senado.gov.ar/web/proyectos/verExpe.php?origen=S&tipo=PD&numexp=2490/05&nro_comision=&tConsulta=3 Jose Fernandez-Calvo (talk) 19:09, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mapuche and the Spartans

I contribute in this article as such: " Lonko Kilapán (b.1903), a traditional Mapuche historian who has been taught the secret history of his tribe by 17 Fichas (tribal sacred story-tellers), suggests that a group of Greeks from Sparta at 600 B.C., via Indonesia and Polynesia, reached Araucanía, then probably a cradle for Mapuches, settled there and got mixed with local Amerindians constituting the ancestors of his population. Kilapán, who is characterized as a sacred narrator of his tribe (epeutuve-επεοτύπης) presented this theory, as a holy apocryphal tradition of his people, in his book “the Greek Origin of the Araucans” (Lonko Kilapán, "El origin Griego de los Araucanos", Editorial Universitaria, Santiago, Chile, 1974), in 1974. His theory (linguistic, sociological and archaeological) appears impressive but does not follow explicit scientific methods and lacks any scientific support! His book was published in greek (Lonko Kilapán, "Η Ελληνική Καταγωγή των Αραουκάνων της Χιλής", μετάφραση Γιάννης Λαθύρης, Ηλιοδρόμιο, Αθήνα, 1997) and constituted a success amongst Greek grecophiles, nationalists and mysticists." But Heironymous Rowe deleted it pointing out: "fringe BS that doesnt belong in this article-take it to the talk page to discuss with other editors before attempting to re insert this nonsense". In my contribution I did point out that this theory lacks any scientific support and I didn't put it in the chapter "origin" byt in a different chapter below the chapter "Mapuches in popular culture". But the fact is that this theory appears in many blogs and seminars in Greece as a real fact! (Look on google search for "Αραουκανοί" or "Lonko Kilapan"). It's something like a popular civil legend in Greece. It's a matter of objectivity to write about this theory even if it is in fact ridiculous... Georalex1 (talk) 01:32, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Find reliable citations to actual historians and scholars addressing this subject, somehow proving its notability for inclusion in this article. Blogs do not count. He iro 01:39, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You'd think you could find some criticisms of this hypothesis somewhere - Georalex1, have you looked? If it's put forward in seminars some academic must have written debunking it. Dougweller (talk) 06:19, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We need someone who speaks Greek or Spanish. Dougweller (talk) 09:24, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I speak Spanish. Btw the Spanish language artiucle which is much better and more comprehensive than this one doesn't mention the theory either. ·Maunus·ƛ· 12:21, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Try a Google search in Google books, see what you can find. Dougweller (talk) 12:51, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to the OP, a search for a Greek meme might be more successful, if there is anything notable or verifiable enough for inclusion here at all. He iro 13:02, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Probably. I used google.es in IE and Bing, which translated my search. Books didn't help. But a web search at Google.es on "El origen Griego de los Araucanos" does. (Note the 'e' in origen, I'll correct Goralex's spelling above, hope that's ok. Found this, which just says Kilapan's credentials aren't what he says they are [1] - but I've just used Bing to translate a Google.es search and that's about all I found. Dougweller (talk) 13:05, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It seems the idea goes back to Alonso de Ercilla's poem La Araucana where he compares the Mapuche emphasis on warfare with the spartans. This[2] article in English explores the topic.·Maunus·ƛ· 13:20, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The etimologia site says that Lonko Kapilán was not in fact the author of the book but that the Euro-Chilean author César Navarrete used the name as a pseudonym and poublished the theory which was seized upon by pan-hellenist fanatics and published in a greek journal called davlos (the torch). ·Maunus·ƛ· 13:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Spanish article es:Origen de los Mapuches mentions the theory as a curiosity.·Maunus·ƛ· 13:29, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear contributors I don't have to scientifically notify an eccentric curiosity or rather a fiction theory. This is the way the most scientists in Greece deal with it! I speak about a Chilean book that has created an urban legent in Greece! I think that the informative strategy of an article must be towards any real & excisting urban legend reffering to the subject. The Spanish edition of WIKIPEDIA does it! This book has been published in Chile, I ve seen it!!!! The Greek version is still in any bookstore and any Greek public library (ISBN : 960-85577-1-2). For a better understanding look on google search : "Η Ελληνική καταγωγή των Αραουκάνων". Dear Dougweller the sites you 'll find in Greek language who deal about the theory are many. Some of these sites have been created even by scientists but not as formal scientific sites. For any details ask me!--Georalex1 (talk) 15:19, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But you do have to use citations to reliable sources, not quote urban legends or use blogs. I did the google search you mentioned above using google translate, and a lot of blogs popped up. Can you point to specific sites such as a news story? or an article in a respected magazine or other such source? Anyone can write a blog and write whatever they feel like, we need more reliable sources than that. He iro 21:47, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Davlos was just a ... panhellenophanatic magazine (one and not the first that presented the theory) which mixes real science and pseudo-science that in fact immediatelly supported this theory. Then everybody of the kind followed. It's not accidental that google results on the item gives 7,180 results (a number quiet not modest for the greek national standards). A lot of researchers (real scientists or volunteers) followed the climax of the strange theory in the Greek society not everytime reffering to it's presenter. Here[3] we see a symposium made in Greece. The published synopsis of this presentation in this site has been made by two scientists (not of the field of linguistics though but quite excepted as autonomus researchers) Dr. Hadjiyannakis and Dr. Dorikos who support the theory of Kilapan presenting new linguistic claims. Here[4] we have two newspapers (not national though) presenting the theory. Here[5] we have a quite reliable news agency that presents the theory as it is published in the most popular news blog in Greece [tromaktiko] and here [6] we have one of the most reliable and popular daily newspapers in Cyprus ("η σημερινή" 06/01/2011) and one of the most popular TV Channels there (Sigma TV) who present the theory not refferring to Kilapan but as it is enriched by the evidents presented by Dr. Hadjiyannakis and Dr. Dorikos (Their new book "Οι Σπαρτιάτες της Χιλής-Γλωσσολογική μελέτη" (The Spartans of Chile-linguistic research)is here[7]). These are just some results I had from a quick search on google. In Fact a lot of Greek and Cypriot reliable newspapers presented the theory and few scientists even accepted it but not everything is on the net. I think that there are few (if any) Mapuches who know that if they go to Greece or Cyprus they are going to be received as far-away-brothers and as descendants of Ancient Sparta by a lot of Greeks. They have the right to be informed about it through WIKIPEDIA even if the theory is just not valid scientifically. And even if this theory is nonsense (looks like), this feeling in Greece is not. There is just a small problem... the media (and through them the public) -excluding Indymedia/Athens- in Greece "don't know" Mapuche but Araucani... (lol) --Georalex1 (talk) 22:53, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On the other hand I think that even the Greeks shoud have to be informed that for Lonko Killapán has been pointed out that is César Navarrete, a Eurochilean who used the pseudonym of a Lonko as I was informed by ·Maunus·ƛ· inthis discussion (I didn't Know it). If this information is reliable! But mainly the Greek readers of WIKIPEDIA must also be informed that this theory has not gained the acceptance of the world, or even the local Chilean or Mapuche one! Or that this theory is considered a curiosity as it is written in the Spanish edition of WIKIPEDIA. They must also be informed that this theory has been first presented by Lonko Killapán and not by Dr. Hadjiyannakis and Dr. Dorikos (as it is a confusion about it in the Greek Media!). Actually Lonko Killapán presents analytically an "Araucanian precolumbian script" in his book(!!!!) Have you ever heard about it?? Is there any excisting Mapuche precolumbian script or his presentation is a pure writer's fiction????--Georalex1 (talk) 13:44, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Machi decolonization

Is this article salvageable or can it be merged here? ...or Machi (shaman)? I am not an expert in this area.--NortyNort (Holla) 11:56, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mythology and Beliefs

This is Way off. Sounds like it was written researched by a non-Mapuche. I will try and correct some of these concepts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marimanque (talk • contribs) 07:27, 15 July 2011

It probably was, but if you want to change it you need to provide reliable sources per the links in your welcome message. See also WP:NOR. Dougweller (talk) 07:37, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sources? Since when do Western academic sources ever corerectly represent "knowledge". I am Mapuche and belong to a Mapuche family Mr. Dougweller and I don't need some white western anthropologist to tell me how my own society is religiously and culturally structured. Unfortunately the whole concept of "a source" only implies that an academic article in the western tradition qualifies as a "source." —Marimanque—

I'm not going to engage in an argument about this, I'm simply saying that we have our policies and guidelines that we expect editors to follow. If you don't like them then I'm sure there are other sites where you'd be happier. We've got Native American editors here who have no problems. Do you realise you've more or less duplicated a paragraph with your edit? And the western Don Armando Marileo is probably a reliable source by our criteria, but you have to actually cite where we can read what he says (journal article, book with the page number, whatever). Ngenechen isn't a source so I'm not clear what you mean by putting it in the reference. Dougweller (talk) 19:33, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is why western academic knowledge production is profoundly flawed. Again the concept of "sources" implies that because it is written in western academic fashion within a methodology certified by other western academics, that it is now "knowledge" and reliable and that before that it was not knowledge. The arrogance is profound. Trying to direct me to another website demonstrates your inability to debate the subject. Native American editors schooled in the western academic tradition like little apples? I am challenging your assumptions Mr Dougweller — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.207.64.226 (talk) 16:24, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Diego Maradona

I know its peculiar to mention him but according to previous Wikipedia pages on him, maradona's father is of native ancestry, could it be Mapuche?

Seems fully possible. But to add that info in wikipedia you have make sure its relevant on the article you add it to and that it is properly sourced. Chiton (talk) 22:02, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Split part of content to Araucanian peoples

As the article is now it has a coverage that includes both the Mapuchu-Mapuche of Araucanía and the wider "Mapuche family" that does also includes Huilliches, Picunches and other peoples. I think that is confusing for the reader, by analogy it would be like having a Latvian people article covering also the concept of Baltic peoples. Any thoughs? Chiton (talk) 22:02, 28 July 2012(UTC)

Separating these peoples in a separate articles is already done. There are articles for these subgroups of the Mapuche that can be expanded if one wishes to do so.Asiaticus (talk) 08:19, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, I have removed the split tag. I do however thing the article ought to be clearer whether it is dealing with the wide Mapuche or the narrow Mapuche Op47 (talk) 20:13, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Statue of Caupolican

That statue is widely known in Chile to not be of a Mapuche given that it is using feathers in its headgear which the Mapuche have never used. It is probably an Apache or something like that. The statue of Caupolican should be removed from the article... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.162.197.107 (talk) 18:06, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image is much better: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/04/Lautaro_Ca%C3%B1ete.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.162.197.107 (talk) 18:15, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Minor edit

In the last sentence of the Arauco War section, I changed "for conquest," which didn't make sense, to "to conquer." Is that what you meant? If not, please correct me. Thanks. KC 17:17, 31 October 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boydstra (talk • contribs)

Tissue volumes

What does this term mean? Since there is no Wiki article to link to, this article must define the term. KC 18:12, 31 October 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boydstra (talk • contribs)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Mapuche. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:05, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Mapuche. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:57, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unfair censorship

I don't see why - when you tolerate on this talk page long paragraphs of complete nonsense about Greeks getting to Chile - my perfectly reasonable surmise about Mapuche contact with Polynesians (based on language, kumara/chicken swaps, funerary monuments, known use of jewellery, known legends of 'long-ears') should be thrown out. My point is that there is SOME evidence for everything I said, whereas there is zero evidence for Spartans getting to Chile. I rest my case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:3597:3400:39BC:D519:370D:BD93 (talk) 08:12, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Non-public external link removed - please rescue if possible

An edit filter forced me to remove an external link in this edit. It wasn't publicly accessible (that's why it tripped the filter - it contains the word "login"), but if someone wants to rescue it, perhaps this history link will help them do so. Hairy Dude (talk) 14:11, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Mapuche conflict (youngs Mapuche dead for Chilean State in 00's).JPG

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:36, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Delimitación territorial del Wallmapu.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:07, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Origins" in the Lede

The following was added in good faith by @AnaHdgs:

Originally from the forests of the southern Andes, Mapuche people lived in the woods as "horticulturalists”<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal |last=Molares |first=Soledad |last2=Ladio |first2=Ana |date=2009-03-18 |title=Ethnobotanical review of the Mapuche medicinal flora: Use patterns on a regional scale |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378874109000269 |journal=Journal of Ethnopharmacology |language=en |volume=122 |issue=2 |pages=251–260 |doi=10.1016/j.jep.2009.01.003 |issn=0378-8741}}</ref>. Mapuche populations shifted towards Argentina and Chile in the sixteenth century<ref name=":0" />

A few days later, also in good faith, @Sietecolores added several cite/dubious tags.

I am removing the info added by AnaHdgs for a few reasons:

The lede is often the only part of an article that people read, and having either questionable info or cite tags is less than ideal.
Anything in the lede must be supported by information (including citations) in the body. AnaHdgs, please find a place for the info in the body, get consensus that it is correct, and only then summarise in the lede.
The MOS suggests not having a lot of cites in the lede, and it certainly isn't the best place for tags disputing info. Sietcolores, It is better to either be bold and delete it or move it down and have the discussion on the talk pages.

Thank you both for helping build Wikipedia! Cheers, Last1in (talk) 00:55, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To classify the Mapuche as "horticulturalist" seem a gross oversimplification. As explained in this article and others Pre-Hispanic Mapuches had a varied economy where small-scale farming (mostly potatoes) was combined with fishing, raining of chilihueques and hunting. The phrase "Mapuche populations shifted towards Argentina and Chile in the sixteenth century" makes no sense. The political entities claiming Mapuche lands as their own have shifted, by Mapuches have always been known to concentrate in south-central and central Chile and nearby areas of Argentina. Mapuche migrations are poorly attested. Sietecolores (talk) 21:56, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Spread eastward

The spread of Mapuche individuals and culture eastward is a complex topic that is often misunderstood and used politically by some people. This topic needs to be addressed with quality sources. To my knowledge there is an early presence east of the Andes (Neuquén Province) and then, in colonial times, an intensification of the presence and a spread further east. Sietecolores (talk) 12:59, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mapuches in Chile and Argentina

Argentina is Mapuche but they do not identify as Mapuche, due to the racism that exists in that country. In Chile there is a trend of indigenism, where people indicate that they feel “identified” as Mapuche for fashion and state benefits, but they really are not, finally there are more real Mapuches in Argentina but racism does not allow them to accept it. 2600:1700:3D65:2810:D5B3:C2BC:838F:9B5E (talk) 22:25, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]