English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

As an extensive literature has already shown, in terms of its organisation, space can be subject to different and even conflicting appropriations simultaneously (for example, Lefebvre, 1974; Vanier, 2009; Miller, 2011), situations where the coexistence of multiple readings of a specific geographic area turns into competition when one of these claims greater legitimacy than the others – as in the case of the sectorizations promoted by the State. Amazonian ethnology provides some striking examples of such divergences. Dominique Tilkin Gallois (2004: 39) calls attention to the tensions between the Brazilian judicial concept of a Terra Indigena (Indigenous Land: IL) with clearly established boundaries and the contiguous extension for the surface area of the land (terra) and the local conceptions of territory forming the basis of a specific society in which spatial discontinuities become conceivable. Contact, though, does not just instil the idea of a closed territory. As Gallois stresses, the process of land regularization generates a “context also favourable to the emergence of an ethnic identity,” since, as she illustrates, it was during the process of demarcating their IL that the Wajãpi moved from “a non-centralized self-representation (without ethnic connotation)” to an “ethnic selfrepresentation” ref lected in the formation of the category “we Wajãpi.” Similarly, Pascale de Robert (2004: 80) observes that during the process of fabricating a territory that they themselves call a ‘cut land,’ the Kaiapó ended up placing more emphasis on the border between ‘us’ and ‘them,’ the ‘whites,’

ETHNOTERRITORIAL RECONFIGURATIONS OFSOCIAL CONFLICTS: FROM CULTURAL DIFFERENCE TO POLITICAL FRAGMENTATION (BRAZILIAN AMAZONIA)