Each people must be perceived not from the point of view of the difference of a substantive, stable, permanent and fixed heritage of culture, or a crystallized episteme, but as a historical vector. Culture and its heritage, in turn, are perceived as a decantation of the historical process, sediment of accumulated historical experience and in a process that does not stop. The cumulative character of this sediment is concretized in what we perceive as uses, customs, and notions of apparently quiet and repetitive, which the anthropological concept of culture captures, stabilizes, and postulates as its object of disciplinary observation. However, every ethnographer who returns to his field ten years later knows that this appearance of stability is nothing more than a mirage, and that customs and customs are nothing more than history in progress. It is noticed, in this way, that custom can be changed and in fact is constantly modified, since the permanence of a people does not depend on the repetition of its practices, nor on the immobility of its ideas. We thus loosen the moorings that sustain identity, without dispensing with it, but referring it to the notion of the people, as a historical vector, as a collective agent of a historical project, which is perceived coming from a common past and building a common future, through an internal fabric that does not dispense with the conflict of interests and the antagonism of ethical sensitivities and political positions. but that shares a story.