Abstract
Objective/context: This article analyzes of ethnographic, geographical and cartographic discourses around transportation infrastructure plans and projects in the Andean-Amazonian foothills of southern Colombia. Specifically, it shows how the colonial and postcolonial vision of the foothills as a physical and symbolic frontier between a “civilized” and a “savage” world has been instrumental in the conception and execution of such plans and projects, and, more broadly, in the control and appropriation of the Amazonian region. Originality: Usually, historical works on the Colombian nation-building have adopted a monolithic and centric vision of infrastructure because development has historically been confined to a limited portion of the national territory. On the contrary, this article focuses on the role of regions considered “frontiers”, “peripheries” or “margins” in the construction and legitimation of a hegemonic state project. Methodology: The research is based on the analysis and contrasting of primary sources such as travelers’ accounts, cartographic representations, and missionary and government archives. Conclusions: By establishing historical continuity in the discourses and infrastructure practices of the Andean-Amazonian foothills, we can conclude that these are part of a long-standing tradition in which the foothills is seen as a frontier, and roads and highways are viewed as “civilizing” infrastructure of the Amazonian space.
Highlights
Objective/context: This article analyzes of ethnographic, geographical and cartographic discourses around transportation infrastructure plans and projects in the Andean-Amazonian foothills of southern Colombia. It shows how the colonial and postcolonial vision of the foothills as a physical and symbolic frontier between a “civilized” and a “savage” world has been instrumental in the conception and execution of such plans and projects, and, more broadly, in the control and appropriation of the Amazonian region
Usually, historical works on the Colombian nation-building have adopted a monolithic and centric vision of infrastructure because development has historically been confined to a limited portion of the national territory
This article focuses on the role of regions considered “frontiers”, “peripheries” or “margins” in the construction and legitimation of a hegemonic state project
Summary
El piedemonte andino-amazónico colombiano se configuró tempranamente como una frontera del poder colonial español. A este respecto, María Clemencia Ramírez ha descrito en detalle la forma en que algunos grupos del piedemonte como los ingas del valle de Sibundoy sirvieron de enlace o intermediarios entre las poblaciones andinas y amazónicas. El acceso de agentes coloniales a la Amazonia fue posible gracias a una red de caminos indígenas, que conectaban con rutas de navegación fluvial en las cuencas del Caquetá y Putumayo, y con el camino real entre Popayán y Quito, en la zona Andina. El misionero franciscano fray Juan de Santa Gertrudis, quien efectuó varios recorridos por la zona del piedemonte durante la década de 1760, menciona que “es camino hecho de todos los días, que lo tienen trillado los indios Sibundoyes entrando y saliendo de Mocoa todo el año”[17].
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call