In this article, we coin the concept of 'material ethnicity' when thinking about the centrality of certain elements of material culture in present redefinitions of ethnic boundaries, especially when these elements are misappropriated by outside actors and become subjects of legal regulation. By analyzing the cases of the Guna (also referred to as 'Gunadule') molas in Panama and Maya textiles in Guatemala, we aim to understand the role of Indigenous textiles in the fluid construction of ethnic identities. We explore the reasons why molas and Guatemalan textiles have become ethnic identifiers, drawing attention to their importance in the construction of corporeality, framing of gender relations, creation of knowledge, perception of appropriation, and temporality – five symbolic practices linked to the ownership of territory. Finally, we present several of the debates about the intellectual property of these textiles and conclude with some considerations on the significance of materiality for political constitution.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mauri et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: