Band Societies Case Study

chapter 3

Band Societies
© Mark Edwards/Photolibrary

GOALS
By the end of the chapter, you should be able to do the following things:
• Realize that foraging societies do not struggle to survive; rather, they have sufficient food and plenty of leisure time Understand the importance of reciprocity as a survival strategy for foragers Describe different ways to reduce conflict Grasp the importance of kin relationships and how they differ from other types of relationships Appreciate the different forms of reciprocity in band societies • • Understand that women play a central role in provisioning the household and that this affords women a position of equality List the characteristics of an egalitarian society Describe the cultural misunderstanding
between colonial powers and foragers about property ownership Grasp the importance of kinship and marriage and describe different systems of kinship reckoning and marriage arrangements Discuss the roles of ritual and healing practitioners

• • •

• •

•

•

section 3.2

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

3.1 INTRODUCTION

I

n this chapter, we will explore the sociocultural characteristics of bands, the oldest social structure in human existence. For most of human history people have lived a foraging, or hunting and gathering, lifestyle. It is the oldest form of human society, dating back to the Paleolithic period, at least a million years ago. People resided in small, self-sufficient, mobile groups called bands. Band socioeconomic life is based on the exploitation of the local flora and fauna. Foragers move over their land year after year, knowing where all the prime locations are for the foods and water needed not only for basic survival but to thrive. Most foraging people live in small, independent communities, which break up and rejoin with different members. They follow a nomadic life within a defined territory and live what is called a subsistence economy, in which people produce only what they need for their survival. Among foragers, there is a continuous movement of goods through kinship ties and residential proximity, which strengthens people’s obligations to each other. The obligation to share, and the mobile lifestyle, inhibit the accumulation of individual wealth. No one exercises ownership in the form of access or control over resources; thus, there are no differences in wealth between people. All of these features result in an egalitarian structure in foraging societies.

3.2 ENVIRONMENT

A

lthough foraging societies live in diverse environments around the world, there are certain similarities in their sociocultural patterns. The most important similarity is that they depend on the environment for their livelihood. In Western culture, wealth comes from what people can generate from the environment, but among foragers, wealth and the environment are the same. Diversity in their environments also creates diversity among foragers. Arctic hunters focus on large animals and do little vegetative foraging, whereas in the tropics, where there is a great deal of biodiversity, people exploit a broad range of plants and animals. Foragers have a very different relationship with their environment than do other types of societies. Contemporary foragers, unlike their predecessors, are confined mostly to the most marginal environments in the world, such as the Arctic, the desert, and the rainforest. These are places that, until recently, others did not want to inhabit because of environmental barriers to food production. These are also locations that allow the foraging communities to remain relatively isolated, having contact with other cultures on their terms. Some foragers have lived in their present location for thousands of years, such as the San in southwest Africa, but others, like the Batek of Malaysia, probably lived in less marginal regions near the coast and either were pushed or escaped to more isolated mountainous rainforest locations. Figure 3.1 shows locations and names of the foraging communities we will refer to in this chapter. One of the best-known hunting and gathering communities in the modern world are the San (“Bushmen”) of the Kalahari Desert. The San have been living in this region for

section 3.3

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

Paiute

Nestilik

Mbuti

San

Batek

Agta

Figure 3.1 NASA Goddard Space Flight Center/Photo Library Foraging communities discussed in this chapter.

thousands of years. Their diets are composed primarily of nuts, fruit, melons, and berries gathered by the women. The women are the primary gatherers and are responsible for contributing nearly 80 percent of the San diet. Men, the hunters, provide the remaining 20 percent of the diet in the form of meat. In the Arctic regions of the world live the modern-day hunters called Inuit. There is little to gather during the Arctic’s long winter, so men’s hunting activities provide nearly all food and other material items the people need. However, in the summer, berries and roots supplement their diets. The tropical rainforest is the last major ecozone where modern-day foragers live. Although the rainforest can provide meat and vegetation, it cannot sustain cultivation, because the soil in the rainforest is not very fertile. Hence, it too is a marginal environment. Rainforestbased foragers primarily hunt small game such as monkeys, birds, wild pig, and deer. Many also fish. Gathering berries, tubers, fruit, and other vegetation is also extremely important.

3.3 ECONOMY

C

ultural anthropologists describe an economy as a system of production, consumption, and distribution of resources (Dalton, 1969; Plattner, 1989; Sahlins, 2004). Cultural traditions and environmental factors shape how items are produced, consumed, and exchanged. Anthropologists examine and compare the © Ricardo Beliel/PhotoLibrary various ways cultures acquire, produce, and A Xingu spear fisherman along a tribuexchange goods and services. Among foraging tary of the Amazon River in Brazil.

section 3.3 cultures, for example, high value is placed on working together and sharing, as opposed to competing with others to secure individual wealth.

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

The Original Affluent Society
An outdated view of foragers was that they struggled to survive. Always on the edge of starvation, foragers needed to work hard to feed their families. Lee, among others who study hunter and gatherers, has provided a very different image of foragers. Even the San, who live in one of the most marginal environments in the world, search for food only two or three days a week. Women can collect enough food in one day to feed their © Nigel Pavitt/PhotoLibrary families for a full week, while men hunt two or San, like other foragers, have many three days a week. The rest of the time is spent in hours of free time for leisure activities, leisurely pursuits: visiting, playing, sleeping, and including socializing with their kin just enjoying each other’s company (Lee, 1979). and friends.

Thus, Sahlins (1972) has called foragers the original affluent society. Affluence means having material items that are in abundance relative to wants and needs. Sahlins points out that there are two possible paths to affluence. The first path involves having limited wants and needs, which makes desires easy to satisfy. In the second path, wants are great and the ability to fulfill them is limited, so high levels of productivity are required. We fall into the latter definition of affluence. We have many material items: big-screen televisions, smartphones, Blu-ray players, and so on. To fulfill these needs, the consumer has to work longer and harder. Instead of one full-time job, people often Consider This hold multiple jobs.
Have you ever bought something you didn’t really need because it was a “new and improved” version, such as an upgrade for a perfectly functioning piece of electronics? Did you have to work more than one job to pay for it?

Foragers do not have many material items, but they are satisfied with what they have; their wants are few and are easily satisfied. Foragers do not constantly strive for more. They have sufficient food, and they have lots of leisure time to do what they would like to do—hence the label “the original affluent society.”

Distribution and Exchange
People in every culture give and receive goods and services. Parents give food, clothing, and shelter to their children. Beyond parent-to-child exchange, the manner of extrafamilial exchange varies from culture to culture. In this text we will explore three distinct forms of exchange: reciprocal, redistributive, and market (Polyani, 1944). Our focus in this chapter is on reciprocal exchange, which is commonly found in band societies.

section 3.3

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

Even though foraging societies reside in very diverse ecosystems and their livelihoods vary, they have similar reciprocal economic systems (Sahlins, 1972).
A reciprocal economic system is a form of exchange of goods and services that occurs between members of a kinship group. The basic underlying principle is reciprocity, a mutual, agreed-upon exchange of goods and services. Reciprocity works well in a society in which food items need to be consumed quickly due to spoilage. Foraging communities are called an immediate return system (Woodburn, 1988) (versus a delayed return system). This means that the consumption of food and other resources occurs immediately. There is little surplus and little desire to develop any storage capacity. Foragers want to remain mobile and not be tied down by surplus. There is no need for storage, because the environment is their warehouse. Whenever they want something, they can access it. If a man successfully brings down a large animal, he and his immediate family would likely not be able to consume all the meat before it spoils. Even if he could preserve the meat, he would have to transport it, which becomes cumbersome. Instead, hunters and gatherers share their food with each other. A hunter is not always going to be successful. If he is successful every couple of weeks, he is doing well. But on the off weeks, his family would be without meat. His neighbor, who was successful in killing an animal, might
have too much meat to consume before it goes bad. The solution is for the successful hunter to share his meat with his family and friends. Everyone gets some meat, even those households in which the hunter came back empty-handed.

Reciprocity
Sahlins (1965, 1972) described three types of reciprocal exchanges: generalized, balanced, and negative. In this chapter, we will talk about generalized and negative reciprocity, and we will look at balanced reciprocity in Chapter 4.

Generalized Reciprocity
If a hunter were always successful providing meat for his family while his neighbor was not as skillful, the household with scarcity would be jealous. In small societies, envy of this kind would inhibit cooperation. The solution is for the household with meat to share with all other households, even those that also have meat. Everyone gets some; no one goes without. Generalized reciprocity is a form of exchange in which there is no expectation for the immediate return of an item in exchange for something else; in the long run, things are expected to even out. An item’s value is not calculated, and no one keeps exact track of the transactions. This kind of distribution of food also means that a hunter does not need to go looking for food daily. A meal for every household is composed of items of food from each other’s labor. Lee, describing the San, says: Not only do families pool the day’s production, but the entire camp—residents and visitors alike—shares equally in the total quantity of food available. The evening meal of any one family is made up of portions of food

section 3.3

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

APPLYING ANTHROPOLOGY 3.1
A Modern Tale About Informal Exchanges of Goods
As discussed in this chapter, every cultural group has a system of distribution and exchange. Foragers’ economic system is usually one of generalized reciprocity, where labor and goods are exchanged without the expectation of immediate return. Generalized reciprocity can also be seen in our modern industrialized society, but it usually occurs between parents and children or between husband and wife; again, it requires a maximum amount of trust and a minimum amount of distance. Money might be spent, for example, to send children or a spouse through school—money that might not be shared with anyone else. In another example of exchange, I grow a good amount of zucchini each year. My neighbor across the street wants to make zucchini bread, and offers to give me home-grown apricots so that I might make jam. This is known as balanced reciprocity, in which a fairly equal exchange is made between people not related to each other. It requires a moderate amount of trust and a moderate amount of distance (you are not strangers). I also share zucchini with my sister who lives in an apartment and is unable to grow fresh produce. I know that at some point she will repay me in some way (generalized reciprocity). Oh, yes, and there is my neighbor who keeps borrowing yard tools and not returning them. I feel hesitant to share my wealth of zucchini with him, as he does not share his tomatoes with me. This negative attitude toward my neighbor is common when someone who is not your kin does not reciprocate.

Questions
1. What does reciprocity mean in cultural anthropology? 2. In cultural terms, can reciprocity be applied to anything other than distribution and exchange of goods? 3. What kind of reciprocity is the exchange of yard work by a neighbor boy for homemade zucchini bread?

from each of the other families in the band. Foodstuffs are distributed raw or are prepared by the collectors and then distributed. There is a constant flow of nuts, berries, roots and melons from one family fireplace to another until each person resident has received an equitable portion (1969a, p. 58). This kind of sharing reinforces important social ties. Generalized reciprocity is based on socially recognized family and kin relationships. The people you are sharing with are not only your neighbors, but also your kin. They are your parents or parents-in-law, your siblings or your spouse’s siblings. They are not strangers. Generosity in sharing maintains kin and social relationships while providing a safety net. If, for example, a hunter is ill or hurt, his family will receive meat from other households in the community. This form of exchange not only maintains kin and social ties but also inhibits the accumulation of wealth, since everything a person has is shared. No one is rich, and no one is poor. Giving of this nature also inhibits feelings of jealousy that arise from calculating what I have versus what someone else has. Success at hunting and gathering is based on skill and individual enterprise. Not everyone is energetic; some people are more laid back or even lazy. While reciprocity insures

section 3.3

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

CASE STUDY 3.1
Saying “Thank You”
How often do you think twice before thanking someone? In this story, saying “thank you” places the relationship between kin into a contractual, businesslike relationship. It implies the receiver has calculated a gift’s value. Kin regularly do things for each other and help each other, but this is expected and no thanks are necessary, because one day, it will be the other way around. Before I left for my doctoral fieldwork, my supervisor Bob told me this story from when he lived with the Semai: One day I thanked a Semai man and he took his index finger, licked it slightly and then drew a line in the air. Another day a similar thing happened with the same man. But this time the action was a bit bigger and stronger. It happened again on another day, getting even bigger, stronger, and much more emphatic. Finally, the action was so strong I could not ignore it and asked my friend why he was making the action. Semai man: “Are we not friends?” Bob: “Yes.” Semai man: “Are we not kin?” Bob: “Yes.” Semai man: “Don’t friends and kin do things for each other? Don’t you do things for me and I for you?” Bob: “Yes.” Semai man: “So why are you thanking me? This is what kinsmen do for each other. They help each other. There is no need to thank me. This is what we do.” I remembered this story when I went to live with Btsisi’ (a cousin tribe to the Semai). After being there for quite some time and having established strong “familial” relationships, one day when my “mother” gave me something (I can’t remember what), I asked her if saying “thank you” was appropriate. She said of course it was. Then one day a man, Atim, gave me something to drink. He was my mother’s cousin. He was also married to my mother’s younger sister, and his older brother at the time was married to my mother’s daughter. So, in a way, he and I were related to each other in many different ways. We certainly were kin. When Atim handed me the bottle I thanked him. I am sure I had done so before. But this time, Atim said to me, “Don’t thank me. I am your kinsman. Don’t you give me things? Why can’t I give you something? Thanks is not necessary.”

food even for people who might be considered lazy, this does not mean a person can remain so without consequences. A young person who is lazy might find that no one is willing to marry him or her. In contrast, an overzealous hunter might be viewed as wanting respect or power beyond what people are willing to give—demanding a status within the community that places him above all others. This will result in him being “cut down”; the other hunters might say the hunted animal he secures is scrawny, or that it is not tasty. These are verbal leveling mechanisms, so that one man does not become too big (Lee, 1969b). The hunter learns to understate his catch, as Shostak (1981, p. 86) describes:

section 3.3

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

San men vary widely in their skill at hunting, but different levels of success do not lead to differences in status. Self-deprecation and understatement are rigorously required of the hunter after a successful hunt. This modesty is in evidence from the moment he enters the village to relay his news. Walking silently, he sits down by a fire. . . He greets people and waits. When they ask, he says, “No, I didn’t see anything today. At least, nothing worth talking about.” The others, well versed in the rules, press for details: “That nothing you saw. . . did you get close enough to strike it?” The San have also developed another leveling mechanism. Although an energetic man might be a successful hunter, he is the “owner” of the meat only if the spear or arrow used to kill the animal was his. A man who does not excel at hunting can therefore be successful by giving an arrow he made to another hunter. If his arrow was used in the kill, he is considered the “owner” of the meat (Shostak, 1981). When we look at systems of generalized reciprocity among foragers, it might seem to us that a successful hunter who shares his catch with his neighbors is admirably generous or altruistic. But Lee (1984, p. 55) explains the reasons behind this culture of sharing among the San: Each San is not an island unto himself or herself, each is part of a collective. . . . the. . . group pools the resources that are brought into camp so that everyone receives an equitable share. The San and people like them don’t do this out of nobility of soul or because they are made of better stuff than we are. In fact, they often gripe about sharing. They do it because it works for them and it enhances their survival. Without this core of sharing, life for the San would be harder and infinitely less pleasant.
Consider This Do you believe that parental care is a pure gift, or do you think parents expect their children to take care of them in their old age? Do you think that people donating money or time to a charity is a pure gift? What might a person receive in return? Have you given a pure give without any thought of return?

Similarly, parents share with their children for more than just altruistic (unselfish) reasons; some say parental care is a pure gift, something given with no expectation of return. Biologically speaking, helping your children survive to their reproductive years insures the passage of parental DNA to another generation. Parental care of children also helps secure the children’s assistance in old age. Helping feed and care for elderly parents is the return of the gift the parents made in their children’s early years of life.

Generalized reciprocity helps foragers in times of environmental unpredictability. Sharing is the foragers’ safety net. For example, in a desert community like the San, if one community’s waterhole dries up, they can ask another community if they may share in the water of that community. In situations in which there is widespread scarcity, evidence indicates that generalized reciprocity among foraging communities not only does not break down, but rather, the amount of sharing actually increases. Among the Nestilik Inuit, for example, Balikci found: “Whenever game was abundant, sharing among non-relatives was avoided, since every family was supposedly capable of obtaining the necessary catch.

section 3.3

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

In situations of scarcity, however, caribou meat was more evenly distributed throughout camp” (quoted in Mooney, 1978, p. 392). Other studies, however, indicate that in cases of extreme scarcity, sharing might be confined to smaller groupings, such as the household (Woodburn, 1968).

Negative Reciprocity
This type of exchange is found between strangers. Each side tries to get as much as they can for as little as possible, in transactions ranging from lively bartering to theft. In fact, negative reciprocity is an absence of reciprocity. What is important about this form of economic exchange is that it provides foragers with the chance to obtain resources they do not produce themselves. This might include food items, such as cultivated grains, or tools made from nonlocal materials.

Division of Labor
If organization is not established to make sure everything necessary is done, there can be too much work to perform on a daily basis. The most obvious way to divide the work is by sex and age. A biological division already occurs with women’s roles as reproducers and nurturers, and this delineation provides a logical basis for dividing the required tasks.
© Nigel Pavitt/PhotoLibrary

A San man prepares a bowstring before a hunt. While the men are the Division of Labor by Sex primary hunters, they are responsible Most typically, among hunters and gatherers, for only 20 percent of the tribe’s diet.

men hunt and women gather. However, sometimes women will bring a small animal home, and sometimes men will bring gathered food. Women also keep men informed of animals they encounter, and men bring home information about plant food that is ripe or abundant. In most cultures, women do not regularly hunt, but there are exceptions, such as the Agta of the Philippines rainforest. Agta women are more successful at hunting than are men, but the women hunt small animals whereas the men go out looking for large game (Estioko-Griffin & Griffin, 1981). Among the Batek, another southeast Asian rainforest foraging society, women can hunt if they wish, but Batek say that men’s breath is stronger

© Nigel Pavitt/PhotoLibrary

A group of San women prepare to go out together on a foraging trip. Women typically go gathering as a group enjoying each other’s company.

section 3.3

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

© Robin Hanbury/PhotoLibrary

An Indonesian man making a blowpipe.

© Tony Crocetta/PhotoLibrary

A Philippine tribal man blowpipe hunting. Note the length of the blowpipe and consider the amount of forced air necessary to have the quiver not only exit the blowpipe but travel far enough with sufficient force to reach an animal and enter its body.

than women’s.
This makes men more efficient at blowpipe hunting than women; stronger breath means the poison dart can go further with more impact. In addition, since women typically do not hunt, their hunting skills are less developed (Endicott & Endicott 2008, p. 20). In the traditional anthropological literature, men’s hunting activities were said to be of greater value than women’s collecting activities. Men were described as bringing more food into the camp and as having higher status because of the greater value placed on meat (Begler, 1978; Friedl, 1975). Recent research (Endicott & Endicott, 2008) shows that both men and women make substantial food contributions that are recognized and valued within their cultures. This highlights the point that the traditional anthropological perspective of men as the sole or most valued household provider is influenced by Eurocentric
views.

© Tony Crocetta/PhotoLibrary

Teaching a boy to hunt with a blowpipe. Note that the man has quivers tucked in his loincloth.

section 3.3
Division of Labor by Age
Labor activities among foragers are also divided by age. Children are mostly involved in play until adolescence. As they mature, they slowly learn the adult activities of their gender. Boys learn to make hunting tools and use them to hunt small animals around their campsite, while girls begin to join their mothers in gathering expeditions. Foraging ethnographies indicate that the most strenuous physical work is left to younger people (Watanabe, 1968). Men’s hunting skills peak in their twenties; by their mid-forties, they leave most of the hunting to younger men (Woodburn, 1968). Laughlin (1968) notes that the further north the hunting group is, the smaller the proportion of people who are actively involved in hunting, with the younger men taking on most of the hunting responsibilities, as highlighted in Table 3.1.

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

© Tony Crocetta/ PhotoLibrary

A Penan man from Sarawak, Malaysia, skinning an animal he just hunted. Table 3.1 Hunting Activities Distinguished by Age and Sex Group Younger men Ainu Bear hunting in areas distant from the settlement Spear fishing (cold season) Long trips for sea mammals On communal reindeer hunts: stabbing animals in canoe Winter seal hunting Winter hunting in mountains Wandering after caribou Trapping long distances On communal hunts: driving deer; killing buffalo Age division Older men Deer hunting near settlement Peep hut fishing (cold season) Short trips for sea mammals On communal reindeer hunts: intercept wounded animals carried away by stream (with women and children) Fishing crabs through ice holes (with women and children) In permanent villages Hunting sea animals (August / September) Berry picking or fishing On communal hunts: hiding by game trails to shoot deer; butchering buffalo

Chukchee

Tikerarmiut Nunatarmiut Iglulimiut Dogrib and Yellowknife Paiute

(Adapted from Watanabe, H. (1968) Subsistence and ecology of northern food gatherers with special reference to the Ainu, In R. Lee and I. Devore (Eds.), Man the Hunter, pp. 69 - 77. New York: Aldine.)

section 3.4
Among hunters of the Arctic region, such as the Inuit, when the elderly become too infirm to keep up and contribute to household survival, they are sometimes left behind, resulting in their death. This is called geronticide.

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

Property
Among foraging communities, neither individu© Doug Allan/PhotoLibrary als nor households have exclusive ownership of An Inuit man with a whale. Note the immovable property (land or territory). Larger youthful strength necessary for hunting. groups, such as bands, with strong sentimental connections and rights to the resources, might be associated with territories (Endicott and Bellwood, 1991). The San, for example, have rights to waterholes, and if others need to use them, they must obtain permission from the group holding the rights. Permission is rarely denied, because the people asking for permission are probably kinfolk of the “owners.” Giving permission means that in the future the band asking for access to water will reciprocate with the band providing the access. There are two kinds of rights to land and resources: use rights and ownership rights. All members of the band have rights to use the resources within a territory, but only those people who are members of the kin group that owns the territory can give permission for people to use the resources. The rules determining who has ownership rights are determined by kinship. We will return to this point later when we examine social organization among foraging communities. Among some foraging communities, territories are well defined and boundaries and resources within the territory are protected. For example, the Paiute, a community of Native Americans in the Great Basin region of the United States, depended more on the pinyon nut, a gathered resource, than on meat. Families and bands had exclusive rights to pinyon nut regions and would defend them from outsiders. Dyson-Hudson and Smith (1978) found that hunting and gathering communities with a highly concentrated and predictable source of food, such as the Paiute’s pinyon nuts, are more likely to have exclusive ownership rights than are societies with unpredictable, dispersed resources. Other forms of property, such as hunting and gathering implements including blowpipes, darts, digging sticks, and dogs or horses, are considered the personal property of individuals. Recall that among the San, the “owner” of a hunted animal is not the hunter who killed the animal but rather the owner of the arrow or spear.

3.4 SETTLEMENT PATTERNS

T

he environment determines population size and population growth. Foraging populations live in small, scattered bands with low population densities—about one person per 100 square miles—in order not to outstrip the resources. Foraging people are aware of the connection between population size and growth and the land’s carrying

section 3.4 capacity, the natural environment’s ability to sustain a people indefinitely. There is recognition that if their population grows unchecked, it will outstrip the available resources, leading to starvation and death. The people are also cognizant that they can’t let their populations get too small, because their foraging techniques would be ineffective and possibly lead to starvation. Foraging communities control population size through a variety of mechanisms, discussed below.

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

© Klaus Paysan/PhotoLibrary

Seasonal Mobility
Most foraging communities are mobile. Seasonal variation affects the availability of local plants and animals, which in turn affects the people living off the plants and animals. Foragers must move frequently in search of food and water. Hunters and gatherers such as the San, who live in the desert, migrate based on water availability. In tropical rainforest environments where there is little if any seasonality, people move for other reasons. They might move to collect honey, like the Mbuti (Turnbull, 1963, 1968), or fruit, like the Batek (Endicott et. al, 1995), but otherwise their movement is based on leaving an area while resources remain to allow for their regeneration.

A MButi woman building a hut. Note the simplicity of the hut. It can easily be abandoned when it is time to move on to a new foraging area.

© Will Gray/PhotoLibrary

A San shelter. Shelters are built quickly, typically in one day, and are made from materials found locally and available to anyone.

The frequent need to move camp inhibits the collecting of material items, which become an encumbrance to mobility. Relocating also requires the building of a new shelter. Shelters are built quickly, typically in one day, and are made from materials found locally and available to anyone. In the Arctic, ice and sealskin are used in shelter construction, and Consider This in the tropical rainforest, trees and leaves are How does the description of shelter used. Shelters are not built to be permanent, construction and ownership differ from but rather are constructed as temporary shelwhat happens in your culture? ters and used as long as needed. Once a shelter is abandoned, anyone else can use it.

Fission and Fusion
Not only does the availability or absence of resources in the environment affect migration, but the environment also determines the size of foraging groups. In times of abundance, groups can aggregate into substantially larger communities than when resources are scarce; this gathering of groups is called fusion. It is during the times of abundance that communities gather and participate in most of their rituals. In times of scarcity, when there is pressure on resources in the environment, group division or fission occurs, with

section 3.4

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

CASE STUDY 3.2
Fission and Fusion as a Hunting Strategy Among Nestilik Inuit
The Nestilik Inuit of the Arctic demonstrate the need for hunters to work cooperatively. People disperse and come together depending on the season and the type of hunting they are doing. The Nestilik depend on animals for most of their material items. The seal is not only a primary food source, but the sealskin is used for keeping their boots warm and dry and their kayaks waterproof, and in constructing their summer dwellings. Other sealderived products include seal blubber, which is used for lighting Nestilik houses. In winter, the Nestilik form large bands of approximately 15 households to hunt seal, the optimum number for hunting seal on the ice. Nestilik social life is at its height in these large winter groupings, with healing rituals and other ceremonies taking place. During the summer months, fission divides the Nestilik into smaller groupings that are more advantageous in other types of hunting, such as following the migrating salmon, waterfowl, and caribou (Balikci, 1968, p. 80).

small groups going in separate directions. Fission reduces the stress on the environment, helping to eliminate the possibility of over-exploitation of a resource or hunger due to scarcity. However, too small a group might have difficulty surviving, because there are too few people with whom to share food or cooperate in hunting and gathering expeditions. Fission is also an effective strategy to eliminate conflict. To avoid a dispute that could lead to serious conflict, it is not uncommon for part of a grouping to move elsewhere, either permanently or temporarily. The split-off grouping might be an individual household or many households that could either go off on their own or join another community. Groups also split up because one household might decide they want to eat a food item found in a different location or visit a relative living elsewhere. Decisions as to where to go are made by each household. It would not be unusual for groups to fuse in one season only to divide and then recombine in a completely different configuration the following season.

Fertility Control
Fission and seasonal mobility are two ways to move a population around the environment. Birth spacing is one of the most important methods of controlling population growth. Generally, a woman can only breastfeed and carry one infant at a time. If children are born too close together, the lives of both the newborn and the older infant may be jeopardized. It is estimated that in foraging communities women need about four years of separation between children (Birdsell, 1968). Breastfeeding is a natural form of birth spacing. When a woman breastfeeds, she produces a hormone called prolactin that inhibits ovulation and pregnancy. Infanticide, or the killing or abandonment of newborn babies, is a form of birth spacing that women use when a baby is born deformed, when a new mother is already breastfeeding a young baby, or in times of starvation. Birdsell hypothesized that the infanticide rate among prehistoric cultures was between 15 and 50 percent of all births. Schrire and Steiger (1974) found that anthropological studies of Inuit infanticide note a range from 15 percent to as many as 80 percent of all births. Ethnographic studies of Australian Aborigines and Inuit (but not San) highlight a preferential practice of female infanticide (Birdsell, 1968). The late onset among many foragers of a woman’s first menstrual cycle (for example, 16.6 years of age among San), which is probably the result of diet and strenuous exercise, also reduces the number of children a woman can have during her lifetime (Howell, 1979).

section 3.5

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

3.5 TECHNOLOGY IN FORAGING SOCIETIES

T

he technology employed by foragers is simple but effective. Even though the technology is simple, it requires knowledge to find and fashion the appropriate tools. The most basic tool is something called a “digging stick,” used by women to dig up root products such as tubers. Net bags and baskets made by women or men are used to hold and carry food. Bark cloth made by women is used in clothing and as a carrying tool. Items that hunters use include spears, bows, arrows, and blowpipes. These latter items, to be made well, require great skill. For example, the producer of a blowpipe must first know the best trees to use and where to find them. He then has to cut the tree down and process it. This requires drilling out the inside, making the appropriate chambers and fusing them together, and straightening the wood. The hunter also needs to know how to make the quivers and darts, and poison for the darts. In Malaysia, hunters use a poison they process from a tree. The hunters need to know what tree to use, locations of the tree (through a vast region of forest because they are mobile and move rather frequently), how to collect and process the material into poison, and how to apply the poison to their darts. Thus, while blowpipe hunting seems to be a “simple” technology, many years of learning and practice are necessary to collect the knowledge and skills to make and effectively use a functioning blowpipe.
Consider This Could you fashion the tools you need for your survival? What technological skills would a forager need most to survive in your society?

© Nigel Pavitt/PhotoLibrary

A Hadza woman from Tanzania uses a digging stick to uncover an edible tuber.

© Klaus Paysan/PhotoLibrary

A MButi forager extracts poison from a plant for his blowpipe quiver. Hunting requires knowledge and skill to make the blowpipe and quiver as well as formal animal tracking.

section 3.6

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

CASE STUDY 3.3
Conflict Among San
Lee notes that San argue about laziness, stinginess, improper food distribution, nonreciprocation of gifts, and infractions of hospitality and etiquette (1972, p. 349, 359). The arguments are . . . peppered with far-fetched analogy and hyperbole. Cases are built up out of an individual’s past bad behavior, and ancient conflicts are rehashed in minute detail. Almost all the arguments are ad hominem. The most frequent accusations heard are of pride, arrogance, laziness, and selfishness. As tempers mount the charges become more and more extravagant. These disputes are puzzling for their apparent lack of clear-cut outcomes. They flare up and die down without either party giving ground. The bubble of tension is often burst by a joke, which reduces the entire camp, including disputants, to helpless laughter. One is astonished to see two men chatting amicably together who only a few minutes before had been shouting abuse at one another (Lee, 1972, pp. 359-360).

3.6 MANAGING CONFLICT AND LAW

C

onflict exists in every culture. How conflict is controlled and resolved differs from culture to culture. Among many foraging cultures, conflict or disruptive behavior is rare. These communities have no rulers, no written laws, no formal rule enforcers, and no formal mechanisms for controlling, capturing, or punishing rule breakers. One reason that major conflict is rare is that bands are small. Kinship is the central organizing principle. In addition, there is little or no private property, and most items, such as food, are shared with everyone. The small size of a community means that people all know each other very well. Everyone is aware of everyone else’s personal inclinations toward stinginess, laziness, or aggressiveness. People are fully aware of these behavioral inclinations, and they are controlled through pressure to conform or simply by moving away.

Leadership
Each band is a distinct social and political entity. Within a band there are headmen or, less commonly, headwomen. There is no larger political unit beyond the band, hence no leadership position beyond the band. A headman has no power to force people to do something they do not wish to do, but instead, they use their charismatic ability to persuade people. If someone does not wish to follow the suggested path, coercion is not an option. Personal autonomy reigns supreme. This is so even among children. Gardner argues that foragers dislike being dominated and highly value their individual autonomy. This cultural value supports the egalitarian nature of foraging societies (Gardner, 1991). A headman is a respected person within the community because of his or her skills as a provider or as an elder, or because personal characteristics, such as generosity and kindness, infuse him or her with natural leadership abilities. The primary role of a headman is

section 3.7

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

to help the group decide where to hunt, gather, or reside. If, however, the headman opts to relocate but others decide otherwise, the headman has no ability to coerce people to move with him. In most cases a community leader is a man, but it could be a woman in certain circumstances. Among San, for example, the oldest woman in a community will have as much if not more ability to convince people to move to a particular location based on her knowledge and experience. Vegetation is found in the same place every year, whereas animals are less reliably found in a particular location. Thus, women’s knowledge about reliable locations to find food is respected and seriously considered. While there may not be an official leader in a foraging community, there is an age hierarchy providing people with varying degrees of status. The older a person is, the more respect he or she receives. Older people have gained more knowledge and experience and therefore can help guide their band.
Consider This Are there older or experienced people in your family or community who merit similar respect?

3.7 SOCIAL ORGANIZATION

F

amily, marriage and kinship, gender, and age are the key principles of social organization in foraging societies. People are related to each other either as consanguines, sharing a common ancestor, or as affines (what we call in-laws) through marriage. The way people are related is important in determining how they behave toward each other. Think how differ© Nicole Duplaix/PhotoLibrary ently you interact with a sibling, a grandparent, Traditionally, learning is experiential or someone you want to marry. In this section we for foraging groups. Here, a San elder will examine social relations in detail. shows lizard tracks in the sand to his grandchildren. Kinship
The nuclear family is the most common type of family in foraging societies. A nuclear family is composed of a mother and father and their children (see Figure 3.2). The nuclear family is most common because, in a foraging setting, it is adaptive to various situations. Multifamily groupings who reside in the same area are called bands. The optimal size of a band is from 25 to 50 people. However, band size is dependent upon the carrying capacity of the environment. Bands are typically composed of a group of related nuclear families. Sometimes the bands are composed of a few extended families (see Figure 3.3), each consisting of a nuclear family with married children, their spouses, and offspring. Such a band composition works best in terms of cooperation and sharing.

section 3.7

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

Nuclear Family

F M S D

Father Mother Son Daughter D

Male F M Female Marriage Descent line Siblings S D

Figure 3.2 Nuclear Family The nuclear family is the most common type of family in foraging societies. Anthropologists use kin charts to represent family relations. This chart shows a nuclear family consisting of parents and children.

Descent
When anthropologists examine kinship, they pay particular attention to descent. This is a cultural rule defining social categories through the parent-child connection. Descent involves the passage of membership through the parent-child links and the incorporation of these people into groups. In some societies, descent groups are used to mobilize people into activities including marriage celebrations and even conflict. We will be talking a lot about descent in the coming chapters. In general, there are two basic patterns for reckoning or calculating descent: unilineal and bilateral. With unilineal descent, kin relations are traced through either the mother or the father. Unilineal descent groups are therefore composed of people related to each other only through men or only through women (we discuss this topic further in later chapters). In bilateral descent, the kinship connections through both the mother and the father are equally important. People believe they are related equally to people on both parental sides. In the United States, there is a bilateral kinship system. Nearly 70 percent of all foragers have bilateral descent. Most Batek can place themselves in a kinship relationship either through the male or female line with every other Batek (Endicott & Endicott, 2008). Because of this kinship relationship, a San will find a relative in every band he or she visits. Reckoning kinship bilaterally is a strategy that is adaptive to times of scarcity. If a family is facing a shortage where they live, they can go to another band’s territory and find kin, a place to stay, and access to water.

section 3.7

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

Extended Family
FF FM

Key
F M FM FF FS FB B Z S D H Father Mother Father’s Mother Father’s Father Father’s Sister Father’s Brother Brother Sister Son Daughter Husband

FZ

F

M

FB

FZS

FZD

Z

B

Ego

H

S

D

D

Figure 3.3 Extended Family Often a band consists of an extended family. Close family ties can help when cooperation and sharing is needed. The ego is used in kin charts to represent the individual from whose perspective kinship is viewed.

Marriage
Marriage is a cultural universal, existing in some form in every culture. It is defined as “. . .a union between a man and a woman such that children born to the woman are the recognized legitimate offspring of both partners” (Committee for the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 1971, 133). Marriage strengthens economic, political, and social links between bands. It brings families closer together through the creation of new visiting and exchange relationships. These connections are important in band societies, because marriage ties extend the web of relationships so that in times of scarcity new band territories and their resources open up if the need arises.

Choosing a Spouse
To ensure the development of linkages and thus alliances between bands, cultural rules are developed to suggest or prohibit potential marriage partners.

section 3.7

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

FZ

FB

F

M

MZ

MB

Ego

Cross Cousins:

Parallel Cousins:

Figure 3.4 Cross Cousin Marriage Anthropologists often discuss two types of cousins, cross cousins and parallel cousins. Cross cousins are cousins from the parent’s opposite sexed siblings. While parallel cousins are cousins from the parent’s same sexed siblings.

Westermarck (1891) argued that there is a universal incest taboo prohibiting sexual intercourse or marriage between certain categories of kin, which typically include parents and children, grandparents and grandchildren, and siblings. Restrictions regarding marrying cousins vary among cultures. Among San, there is a prohibition against marrying any relative who is a second cousin or closer. A man is also restricted from marrying a woman who has the same name as his parent or sibling. These rules mean that nearly 75 percent of the population belong to the prohibited marital category. This pattern results in expansive and overlapping affinal networks, which are useful for expanding access to resources. Batek allow cousins to marry, but this practice is very unusual among the foraging groups in Malaysia. In contrast, Australian Aborigines have a cross-cousin marriage rule. Crosscousins are the children of opposite-sex siblings, such as the father’s sister or the mother’s brother. Thus, a man might marry either his father’s sister’s daughter or his mother’s brother’s daughter. Parallel cousins are children of same-sex siblings, such as the father’s brother or the mother’s sister (Figure 3.4).

Marriage Theories
Lévi-Strauss (1969) argued that bands exchange women when men marry their crosscousins. This results in alliances between the groups. To do this, Lévi-Strauss argued, bands were exogamous and postmarital residence was patrilocal. In other words, members of a band marry outside their band (exogamy), and upon marriage the couple lives with the groom’s band (patrilocal). Patrilocal residence with cross-cousin marriage

section 3.7

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

means that a man marries his father’s sister’s daughter and they reside in his community. His wife’s mother’s natal band is his band; upon marriage, his wife moves to live with him.

Forms of Marriage
Anthropologists differentiate between two forms of marriage: monogamy and polygamy. Monogamy is marriage between two people. In some cultures, including foraging cultures, marriage is not necessarily a lifetime commitment; people might have multiple partners over their lifetime. This is called serial monogamy.
Consider This Can you think of any celebrities who are serial monogamists? To start you off: Elizabeth Taylor has been married eight times, including two times to Richard Burton; and Zsa Zsa Gabor has married nine times. Do you know anyone who is a serial monogamist?

Polygamy occurs when a person has more than one spouse. It could be a man having more than one wife, polygyny, or a woman having more than one husband, polyandry. Among some foragers, while monogamy is most common, polygyny is allowed. The success of polygyny varies greatly between societies and between households. Sororal polygyny, when a man marries sisters, is more likely to be successful than nonsororal polygyny. This is because the women have grown up together, which may reduce the jealousy between them. The few cases of sororal polygyny I encountered among the Btsisi’ were more successful than nonsororal polygyny for this reason. When I asked sisters who were married to the same man if they were jealous of each other, they said: “How could I be jealous or angry with my sister? I would get angry with my husband first, but not my sister” (Nowak, 1981). Polygyny creates a scarcity of eligible women for marriage. Sometimes girls are promised in marriage to mature men before they are born. It is therefore possible for a 12-year-old girl to be married to a 30- or 40-year-old man. Typically such a couple remains sexually inactive until the girl reaches menarche. Delaying men’s marriage until they are 25 to 30 years old allows them time to develop the necessary hunting skills they will need to care for a family. San girls usually resist marriage, feeling they are too young. Parents pressure their daughters into acceptance. The groom moves into the bride’s family’s band, since the bride is too young to leave her family. The rule that a groom resides with the bride’s family is called matrilocality. Matrilocality allows the bride’s parents to make sure the groom treats their daughter properly and to serve as her advocate while she is young and still learning how to support her position.
© Sylvain Grandadam/PhotoLibrary

Polygamy is found in a variety of cultures.

The groom contributes meat to the bride’s band in what is called brideservice. The brideservice also

section 3.7 functions to bring the two bands closer together. The San groom will stay and do brideservice for as long as 10 years. The bride’s family tries to make their son-in-law’s life happy so that he will stay even longer, ensuring a provider of meat for the bride’s parents in their old age (Shostak, 1981, p. 129).

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

The San groom, often in his mid-twenties, cannot expect his marriage to be consummated for © Ben Edwards/PhotoLibrary as many as five years after his marriage. He must Some cultures have marriages arranged be patient for his bride to mature physically at a very young age, such as this couple and emotionally. The groom waits because with from India. polygyny, young women are scarce. The bride, being young, is not yet prepared to take on the responsibilities of a household. But, slowly, with time, she takes on more and more of the physical burdens of running a household. Not all marriages are so strictly controlled by the older generation. For example, among the Batek of Malaysia, a man and woman independently decide their marital fate. Parents can try to influence who their children marry, but parents cannot demand or require their children to marry or not marry particular individuals within the confines of Batek incest rules. The Endicotts note that Batek reasons for marriage include physical attraction and love. Batek also desire a partner who is industrious and will participate in household activities (Endicott & Endicott, 2008). Virginity before marriage is not important in foraging societies. In some, sexual experimentation is a given before marriage. Among Batek, for example, some married couples were adolescent partners who had on-again, off-again relationships. Sexual trysts among Batek could end, or they could evolve into marriage. Batek do not have marked wedding ceremonies. A couple is considered married when they begin residing together and performing the activities of a husband and wife.
Consider This What do you think are the advantages and disadvantages of arranged marriages? Do you think they can be as successful or more successful than marriages of choice?

Initially the couple resides matrilocally, but after a year or so, they move to the man’s band and live patrilocally. Even after years of marriage, some couples continue to shift from one band to the other, keeping their kin ties strong with both bands.

Divorce
Among most foragers, divorce is easy. Divorce among the San is not uncommon. It usually takes place in the early years of a marriage, prior to the birth of any children. It is the wife who typically initiates the separation. Divorce is easy in part because there is little division of wealth, which is often what makes the dissolution of marriages in modern Western cultures so difficult. Among Batek, in which cohabitation merges into marriage,

section 3.8

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

when a couple no longer resides together they are no longer considered married; hence, they are divorced. Divorce not only is easy and frequent, but it typically does not result in the breakdown of kinship ties. People are often related in a variety of ways, so the linkages exist beyond marriage. Child custody issues are not antagonistic, as they are in modern Western society. Infants typically stay with their mother, who is breastfeeding them, but older children are allowed to choose the parent with whom they want to live, and they can move back and forth without causing animosity between the divorced parents, thus reducing the impact of separation on children’s development.

3.8 RITUALS AND RELIGION

A

ll cultures are interested in explaining how the world came into existence and how humans are related to other living things. Sir Edward Tylor (1871) believed that magic, religion, and science are all ways people try to understand the physical world. The religious systems of foraging peoples are different from the religions of modern Western society. There is typically no all-powerful god; instead, there is a belief that every living thing has a spirit, so that the boundary between the natural and the supernatural worlds is not as distinct as it is in modern Western religions. Animate as well as inanimate objects in the natural world are steeped with sacred significance. Hunters and gatherers live in a world where they cannot control the environment; rather, they try to live with their environment. There is a sense of oneness with nature. People do not consider themselves superior to the natural world. All © Dozier Marc/PhotoLibrary plants and animals are sacred and contain a spiri- A Huichol shaman from Mexico treats tual essence. It is therefore morally imperative his patient. to treat the natural world with respect. Foragers have a connection of trust with the environment, knowing the environment will provide for their material needs. Hence, Inuit believe the spirit world releases animals for the hunters. It is the hunters’ responsibility to offer their respect by performing a small ritual acknowledging the spirit world’s generosity and ensuring that the animal’s soul is released for its return to the spirit world (Riches, 1996). The Mbuti perceive the forest as sacred, as a “deity” whom they ask for help and to whom they give thanks through their ritual ceremonies.

section 3.8

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

CASE STUDY 3.4
Dreamtime Among Australian Aborigines
In Australian Aboriginal culture, Dreamtime has a variety of interlinking meanings including the period of creation, the moral order, ancestral beings, and the source of all spirits. Dreamtime can also refer to a specific geographic or topographic point or a totem spirit (animal spirit recognized as a kin group’s ancestor). It is an all-pervasive philosophy that permeates all aspects of Aboriginal life. A group associated with a totem shares a mystical connection. Aboriginal people believe that they are like their totem and that the totem gave birth to their ancestors in a mythical time. The association between people and their totem is so strong that Aboriginal people believe their health is linked to the totem’s well being. Hence, people carry on periodic rituals to ensure the totem’s welfare. Aboriginals believe that the ancestors deposited the spirits of living beings on earth during the Dreamtime, the period of creation. All the spirits inhabiting the natural world come from the Dreamtime. Ancestors still exist in the Dreamtime, and it is their role to act as intermediaries between the human world—the profane world—and the sacred world of Dreamtime. The ancestors intervene in life and death. They control our feelings and our lives. Dreamtime thus explains creation while also playing a significant role in a person’s present and future life. Dreamtime can be seen through art, through myths and stories, and through dreams. It is through these channels that humans can communicate with the ancestral world.

© Goran Burenhult/PhotoLibrary

Dreamtime is a reflective experience among Australian Aborigines. It describes creation as well as setting forth the moral authority for how people should behave.

During the Dreamtime, the ancestors traversed the earth, marking individual bands’ territories. Ancestors traveled the earth creating sacred sites and songlines, which are songs describing geographic and topographic features of sacred paths that allowed people to navigate long distances.

Rituals
A ritual is a formal, repetitive procedure in a rite, either religious or nonreligious. Rituals are sometimes performed privately by individuals and sometimes by ritual specialists, such as priests or shamans. People may perform rituals at set times, and often in sacred spaces. The sequence of words and actions in a ritual are typically duplicated with some flexibility. The Consider This molimo described in Case Study 3.5 is an example of Can you describe five rituals you have a ritual thanking of the animal spirit who gave its either participated in or observed? life as food to Inuit.

section 3.8

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

CASE STUDY 3.5
The Mbuti Molimo Ritual
The molimo ceremony is a major ritual in Mbuti life. It is performed by men and is associated with singing and the use of a trumpet called the molimo. The molimo is associated with death after a successful hunt, but it also may be performed at any time of crisis, such as a poor hunting season, in order to restore balance in people’s lives. Molimo refers both to the ritual and to the trumpet through which Mbuti men sing to make the animal sounds and music. The trumpet is a long, hollow tube, and is stored high in a tree between uses. In the early part of the day men collect food and firewood from every hut in the camp, signifying unity and cooperation in invoking the molimo appearance. In the evening, men gather around a central fire to take part in the dancing and singing; women and children must stay in their huts with the door closed, as they are not allowed to see the molimo. During the singing and dancing, the young men leave the central fire and go to the forest to collect the molimo and carry it to the village. When the youths arrive with the molimo, they circle the camp’s periphery, making sure that the singing and dancing around the central fire is good enough to enter. When the singing is most intense, the youths enter with the trumpet, adding its sound to that of the others. One youth holds one end while another sings into the other end, slowly circling around the fire. Depending on how well everyone dances and sings, the trumpet might stay only a few minutes or all night. After the ceremony, the molimo is again stored in a tree until its next use.

Practitioners
In many foraging cultures people called shamans act as intermediaries between the natural and the supernatural worlds. Shamans are healers within their communities. They not only heal individuals but also heal the problems within their community. Shamans are not specialized practitioners who make their living through their work. Rather, they participate in the everyday tasks that everyone else does and when needed, they take on the role of shaman. Through an apprenticeship a shaman, who may inherit the ability to heal, learns to move between the human and the supernatural world. A shaman will have a spirit familiar, or spiritual intermediary, who will help in the journey between the worlds. Shamans enter a trance or an altered state of consciousness and travel to other worlds with the help of their spirit familiars. Shamans can be male or female, depending on the cultural rules. A Batek man or woman can become a shaman either through apprenticeship with a practicing shaman or in dreams with the help of a spirit familiar. A Batek man has a female spirit familiar, who becomes his spirit wife, and a Batek woman has a male familiar, who becomes her spirit husband. In some cultures, shamans use their power to cause rather than heal illness. Shamans who make people sick are sometimes said to be using sorcery. Among Wik, an Australian Aboriginal community, deaths blamed on sorcery can incite conflict among the opposing groups. All deaths are attributed to human agency, either through physical violence or sorcery (Martin, 2008).
Consider This How does the discussion of sorcery among Wik compare to the Salem witch trials?

section 3.9

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

3.9 FORAGERS IN A CHANGING WORLD odern-day foragers do not live in isolation; they are not Stone Age survivors. Material concerning their way of life is presented in what anthropologists call the “ethnographic present,” which is a way of describing a culture frozen in time during an anthropologist’s field research. As Kottak (2008) notes, the dramatic changes affecting people’s lives makes it difficult for anthropologists to decide if it is best to write in the present or the past tense. The deci© Nigel Dickinson/PhotoLibrary sion in this text is to describe traditional culture Dayak group blockading a logging and then explore cultures in the contemporary road in an attempt to stop the continworld at the end of each chapter. It is essential to ued clear fell logging in their tradiunderstand that hunters and gatherers and the tional hunting lands. other cultures we will explore in this course are not unchanging or frozen in time, nor are they uninterested in the modern world. They are interested in adopting some of the cultural artifacts and ideas they come in contact with, but it is important to understand that the choices should be their choices, not ours. Many governments and people do not recognize that modernization or development should not be on Western society’s terms but rather the choice of the members of the cultural community themselves. Culture is never static. But the changes that foraging cultures are going through today are much greater and much quicker than what they’ve experienced in the past. Outside forces are imposing much of the change. For example, among the San, their hunting and gathering lifestyle is disappearing. The governments of Botswana and Namibia are forcing San to relocate into permanent, settled villages. San land is being claimed by neighboring ethnic groups, who are fencing the land to secure cattle and goat herds. Traditional hunting lands are restricted to the tourism industry, leaving people with no opportunity to participate in hunting. Forced onto mission settlements to raise livestock or grow food, and no longer able to hunt, San are denied the ability to be selfsufficient (Gordon, 1984). Government rations of mealie meal and sugar contribute to poor diet and ill health (Volkman, 1984). Such changes are tak© Nigel Dickinson/PhotoLibrary ing an independent people and turning them into A Dayak woman of Sarawak, Malaydependents of the state. sia, weaves a traditional basket. Today, The discussion in Case Study 3.6 shows that the women weave these baskets for cash San system of sharing is breaking down (Volkman, sales to tourists.

M

section 3.9

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

CASE STUDY 3.6
San in the Movie The Gods Must Be Crazy
In the 1980 film, Xi (played by N!au, a San from the Kalahari) and his San community are following a traditional foraging lifestyle when a Coke bottle thrown from a plane lands in front of him. The San believe the bottle is a gift from the gods, and Xi’s band finds many uses for it. Soon everyone wants to possess the bottle, and this causes dissension within the community—jealousy, anger, and aggression. The movie then moves away from the community when Xi attempts to return the bottle to the gods. The movie was a big hit, but it stirred up enormous discussion about the way the movie depicted San—as “noble savages,” unaware of the outside world and living a utopian life in which one foreign object results in cultural disarray. This kind of portrayal implies that foraging people are totally isolated and unable to understand things outside their own culture. Lee argued that the utopian perspective on modern day San life romanticizes the San while ignoring modern Sans’ struggles to survive in what was then an apartheid-divided Southern Africa. It ignored the century of genocide by Afrikaners who were encroaching on San lands (Lee, 1985), and the government’s expropriation of San lands for farms and tourist parks, which pushed San into squalid, disease-ridden mission settlements. At the same time that The Gods was being filmed, anthropologist John Marshall was filming N!ai: The Story of a !Kung Woman. Marshall’s film documented San mission settlements, including alcoholism, the missionaries’ racism toward San, and fighting and jealousy over hidden property. N!ai talks about people’s jealousy of her role in the film and the income she received.

1982). This is occurring not only among San but also Consider This among other foragers. For example, some Batek are Have you seen the movie The Gods now growing rice. Traditional, nomadic Batek arrive Must Be Crazy? What did you think of at their relatives’ rice fields at harvest time to claim it? After learning about the San and their share. One Batek man no longer wanted to deal reading a critique of the movie from a with his grasping relatives, so he moved away and different perspective, do you see the left his harvest behind (Endicott, 1991). Today peomovie differently? ple’s values are changing. Material possessions are becoming more important. A sedentary, or permanently settled, life means that people can collect and save things; they can accumulate wealth and hide it from their neighbors and kin. When people are no longer dependent upon each other as they once were, accumulated and hidden wealth results in jealousy, animosity, and fighting, which can no longer be diluted by moving to another band’s territory. Although many foraging cultures are struggling with change, they are also adapting. They are learning to work within the national systems in which they find themselves, often with the help of local, national, and multinational nonprofit organizations that are working to ease foragers’ struggles and assist in fighting land grabs through the local judicial systems. For example, through land claims tribunals, Australian Aborigines are trying to establish legal title to traditional lands claimed by Australian developers, using dreamtime and songlines.

questions

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

SUMMARY
Modern-day hunters and gatherers probably do not live in the environments they would have exploited a millennium ago. Pushed by more dominant, powerful cultures into very marginal environments, modern foragers have been able to maintain their sociocultural patterns in a relatively isolated existence. When they desire outside contact, foragers have been able to moderate the communication mostly on their terms. However, foragers today face many new challenges to their traditional way of life. Foraging populations traditionally are stable, with little growth and low population densities. The social organization of foraging societies is based on kinship, sex, and age. Kinship relationships determine access to resources, including band membership and sharing relationships. Bands have no formal, centralized political organization. Leadership is based on personal qualities and experiences. Both men and women in most foraging societies are equally valued for their contributions and knowledge. Although there is violence in some communities, warfare is rare. Religion in foraging societies is based on a relationship with the environment. People believe in oneness with their environment; both the world of humans and the natural world contain spirits that should be respected and cared for. Humans can cause an imbalance in this world, which would then need to be fixed. Foragers are no longer able to control their degree of contact with the outside world; today they are at the mercy of powerful nation-states that appropriate their land and restrict them to reservation living, making it difficult for them to carry on traditional subsistence activities. This makes them dependent and vulnerable.

QUESTIONS
1. What can we learn from studying foraging societies? Is there anything we can learn regarding our relationship to the environment, or our family members, for example? 2. What is the ethnographic present? Do you think that the use of the ethnographic present in the film The Gods Must Be Crazy was appropriate, or do you think Lee’s criticisms are valid? 3. Do you think the view of many anthropologists (pre-1970s) that men’s hunting activities are more highly valued than women’s gathering activities is an etic perspective based on Eurocentric notions that men are the family “breadwinners”? Do you think this view is outdated (based both on more recent ethnographic information and changes in American culture)? 4. An Inuit mother has just given birth to a baby. She has a one-year-old baby still dependent on her milk. It is the season of food scarcity, which means the mother is not as well nourished as she could be. She and her husband decide that their older child is a higher priority, and they opt to end their newborn baby’s life. Considering the concepts of ethnocentrism and cultural relativism, discuss the practice of infanticide.

videos

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

VIDEOS
The San
Slide show about San http:/ /www.slideshare.net/PaulVMcDowell/kung-san-of-the-kalahari-desert Bushmen: Last Stand for Southern Africa’s First People http:/ /ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0102/feature6/media2.html Kung! San of Botswana http:/ /www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wI-9RJi0Qo The following film examines the importance of women’s activities in San survival and in the San fight for their land. We will talk about this later point in greater detail later in the course. http:/ /www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeM05gUP7Z8&feature=PlayList&p=3EA5C5414A97 42B8&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=11 N!ai, The Story of a !Kung Woman, by John Marshall, is well worth viewing.

The Mbuti
Mbuti of the Ituri Forest. http:/ /ckuik.com/Mbuti_Pygmies_of_the_Ituri_Rainforest This series of videos highlights Mbuti song and music as well as providing excellent footage of their campsites and hunting activities. Ituri Forest Pygmies, 2005 National Geographic http:/ /ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0509/feature5/multimedia.html

Batek
The Taman Negara Batek: A People in Transition Susanne Hashim and Paul Faulstich, Cultural Survival Quarterly 9.3 (Fall 1985) Nation, Tribe and Ethnic Groups in Africa http:/ /www.culturalsurvival.org/ourpublications/csq/article/ the-taman-negara-batek-a-people-transition

videos
Inuit
A video on Inuit shamanism http:/ /www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kxdqjn1sFM8

CHAPTER 3 • BAND SOCIETIES

Paiute
Paiute Native American shaman Wovoka and the Ghost Dance http:/ /www.youtube.com/watch?v=cI0Jfdkq4z8&feature=related