Geotano D
ha
r
map
Litr
a
ANU 3751519
Thesis submitted in partial requirement
for the degree of Master
ofArts
Department,
ofPrehistory and Anthropology
Summary of Thesis
i i i C n 3.
p
P s r 1 i rj p c jj'- •;K a -n • ,-i- !— ... .. I- - 1 - u -- iT> v - f : d p i i
a r
ra
1 1v
a;
;
t
h
estructural ist method to approach the subject;
and
the
uac!<ground or this work. The
m a m topic
of this project
is to
analyze Aboriginal
narratives based
on
samples
surveyed from
Waterman’s
(1973)
tale-type
index
of
(,
U
p
t !
•
«
111 a
n
hpo
r i g i n
a 1
o
r
a 1
n
a
r
r
a
t i v
e
s .
I n
a 11 ,
?
9
~
narratives were taken as the data base
of
this
work..
IWD thingS ars Qf interest to this
study.,
the
animal
agents used in the narratives as dramatis personae, and
sne ail egorization of the Aboriginal social context 'm
their narratives.
in chapter 2, I describe the narratives in
context.
[he
flrst
part
describes
various
approaches
and
previous works done on animal symbolism and
mythology.
N'Sxt, 1 describe the social ideas of animals, why
they
are important
in
the
narratives
and
how
are
they
related m
traditional
Aboriginal
life.
Since
most
narratives
are
part
of
Aboriginal
religion,
the
following part discuss the conception of
the
Dreaming
and its relationship to the narratives.
Chapter 3 is the analysis of the sampled narratives.
1
ih
’
~a ma *n Ablest ions posed i n chapter 1
Ci.e.
on
the
f r a m e w o r k o f t h i s a n a I y s i s . H e r e , e a c h n a r r a t x v e w a s b r o k e n into a n a l y t i c a l u n i t s or c o n s t i t u e n t p a r t s (its c o n s t a n t an d v a r i a b l e ) a n d c l a s s i f i e d to suit the f r a m e w o r k of t h e probl e m s . I have s h o w n that, b ased on th e m a s t r e c u r r e n t o p p o s i t i o n a l r e g isters, the issues o f m a i n t e n a n c e o f s u r v i v a b 11 i t y , g r o u p c o h e r e n c e , a n d s o c i a 1 o r d e r a re the most i m p o r t a n t ideals e m b e d d e d in t h e n a r r a 11 v e s a s a w h c 1 e . I n b r i n g i n g o u t t h o s e
ideals, a n i m a I a p e c l e s w e r e a s s i g n e d v a r i o u s c u 11ur a 1 r□ les in the nar r a t i v e s , a nd t h eir soctal c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n s c o r r e s p o n d w i t h t h e i r c h a r a c t e r i s t ics
in nature.
to
n a t u r e b e c a u s e of t h e i r cultu r e - t h i s does not ,r. •/s h o 1 d .. T In e n a r r a t i v e s t h e n - s e r v e t h e A b o r i g i n e s as a m e a n s of r e s o l v i n g the p a r a d o x e s that are p r e s e n t-P a g e
A c k I“ ow l e d g m e n t v
1. L o o k i n g i n t o A b o r i g i n a l N a r r a t i v e s I
A. B a c k g r o u n d o f T h i s Wor k 1
B» T h e D a t a 10
C. Q u a l i f y i n g t h e D a t a 12
D „ I n s i d e , O u t s i de 14
E„ M e t h o d o l o g y 15
2 . M y t h s a n d A n i m a l s 19
A. A p p r o a c h e s t o t h e S t u d y
o f N a r r a t i v e s 19
8 . T h e S o c i a l I d e a o f A n i m a l s 28
C . A n l ma I s i n t he A bo r l g m a l Wo r I d 33
D. T h e D r e a m i n g 36
3 . A n i m a l s w i t h Human F a c e s : A n a l y s i s o f t h e N a r r a t i v e s
A» T h e L i s t o f S a m p l e d N a r r a t i v e s ^
B. T h e O p p o s i t i o n a l R e g i s t e r s
C. C h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n s o f A n i m a l S p e c i e s ^ r t o
D . T h e An i ma 1 s i n t he N a r r a t i v e s 00
E. R o l e A s s i g n m e n t o f A n i m a l s i n t h e N a r r a t i v e s
F„ I d e a l s i n t h e N a r r a t i v e s 71
G. T h e N e e d f o r E x p l a n a t i o n s
i n t h e N a r r a t i v e s 78
H. T h e E m b e d d e d I d e a s o f S o c i a l R e l a t i o n s g3 I . I n d i v i d u a l a n d G r o u p R e l a t i o n s 34
J . F a m i l i a l A f f a i r s 92
K „ A f f a i r s o f F i r e 96
4 . T h e S u r v e y o f t h e N a r r a t i v e s : C o n c l u s i o n
R e f e r e n c e s C i t e d i n T e x t u j
A p p e n d i c e s :
A p p e n d i x 1- L i s t o f S a m p l e d N a r r a t i v e s 120 A p p e n d i x 2 . S p e c i e s C h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n
i n S a m p l e d N a r r a t i v e s 181
A p p e n d i x 3» N a r r a t i v e C o n s t i t u e n t s :
C o n s t a n t s a n d E x p l a n a t i o n s 187 Ap:< p e n d i x 4 . C a t e g o r i e s o f Soc i a 1 T h e m es
an*d C o r r e s p o n d i n g N a r r a t i v e s 194
V
A c k n o w l e d g m e n t
I c a m e to A u s t r a l i a as a part of the* U n i v e r s i t y of I n d □ n e s i a •" s p 1 a n t o e s t a b 1 i s h a n A u s t. r a i i a n 3 1 u d i e s center. W i t h t h e help of m a n y p e o p l e I wa s a b l e to 1 e a r n a n d e x p a n d m y k n o w 1 e d g e o -f t h e A b o r i q i n a 1 c u i t u r e ,, a c u 11 u r e w h ich i n m a n y w a y s i s n o t u n 11 k e m y own S u n d a n e s e c u 11urs. A part of that 1e a r n i n g p r o c e s s ha.s r e s u I t e d i n t h is t hesis.
A n y t h e s i s w o u. i d n at be c a m p l a t e d w i t h o u t t h e a s s l s t a n o e of var ious perso n s . I w o u i d I i ke to t a !•.e t h i s t h i s o p p o rtu n i t y ta t h an k t h o s e people. I wis h to e x t e n d my t h a n k s p a r t i c u l a r l y to Dr. D a v i d R e e v e and Dr .. Nur hadi M a g e t s a r i , 'Uni v e r s i t y of I ndc n e s i a , who naye m a d e it p o s s i b l e for me to s t u d y A b c r i g i n a 1 cu 11 u r e at thie A u s t r a l ian N a t i o n a l Uni v e r s11 y . I t h a n 1:
the t e a c h e r s a nd the s t a f f of the D e p a r t m e n t of A n t h r o p o l o g y an d P r e h i s t o r y , AMU, for the a s s i s t a n c e they have a f f o r d e d me to a c h i e v e that and. T h a n k s also t o P r o f . I . M c B r y d e a nd W. Sh a w cross. Id A , w h o a c t e d a s m y c gu r s e s u p e r y i s o r s .
3 p e c i a 1 t h a n k s to D r . Ian K een, my t h e s is s u p e r y i s o r and t e a c h e r of t h e c u l t u r e w h i c h I ca m e to learn about. D r . K e e n has a l s o p a t i e n t 1y and k i n d l y e d i t e d t h i s w o r k .
I w o u l d a l s o like to t hank the I n t e r n a t i o n a l D e v e l o p m e n t P r o g r a m for A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s and C o l l e g e s , and its staff, w h o have s u p p o r t e d my stay in C a n b e r r a f r o m 1938 to 1990.
The i n s p i r a t i o n for t his wor k has b e e n A .C . va n der L e e d e n - s t.sac h i ng at t he 32 p o s t g r a d u a t e p r ogr am i n U I . To my wife, D r s . I nqe Ber nar d , and my prec ious d a u g h t s r A d i n d a , I am p e r m a n e n 1 1y b e h o l d e n for b e a r i n g w 1 1 h me t h r o Li g h o u t th i s t i m e .
A.
Background of This Work
A myth
is a narrative.
It
is a structured,
predominantly culture-specific and shared
semantic
system which is well
known among the members of a
particular community or society.
Such
narratives
explain the origins of natural and social phenomena and
the interrelationship among people, their deities,
the
universe,
and their surrounding environment,
thus
enabling the members to understand each othen-
and to
cope with the unknown
(Georges
1968:230;
Maranda
1972:12-13).
Myths are important in Aboriginal life because they
constitute the body of
narratives
in. which their
beliefs find a
"relatively
standardized
verbal
expression" (Berndt and Berndt 1965:198).
Levi-Strauss
(1972:208-212) has said that myths may be seen as a
language comprised of constituent units which are
represented as discrete actions embedded
in
the
narratives of the myths.
Narrative consist of a series
a g e n t , or d r a m a t i s per s o n a e , w i t h a t h e r agent s ar ob j e c t s . T h e s e u n i t s in t h e n a r r a t i v e s are r e l a t e d w i t h o t h e r u n i t s of the s a m e story t h u s forming what, is c a l l e d a "bun d 1e " of ev e n t s (L4v i - St r aus s 1972:211), s o m e t h i n g like a s e r i e s of uni lineal o r c h e s t r a l scores w h i e h f o r m t h e m e l o d i e s (ibid., 1979:211). T h l s s e r i es o f e v e n t s i s c o m m o n l y t e r rne d the sy nt aq mat i c c rv.a i n „ T he i m p l i c i t m e a n i n g s in e a c h n a r r a t i v e may be disc over e d by c o m p a r i n g on e to another, f i r s t by b r e a k i n g the n a r r a t i v e down into c o n s t i t u e n t units, or bundles. T h a t is, by r e d u c i n g t h e m into s i m p l e s t a t e m e n t s , so that t h e y may be a r r a n g e d a c c o r d i n g to t h e i r s i m i l a r i t i e s or o p p o s i t e n e s s . W i t h th i s m e t h o d it is h o p e d th a t the r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n th e e v ent or a c t i o n ma y be d i s c o v e r e d .
T h r o u g h t h i s p r o c e d u r e , it is h o p e d to d i s c o v e r a s e r i e s of r e l a t i o n s f r o m c o m p a r i s o n s of the bundles. A c c o r d i n g to L e v i - S t r a u s s (1979:190), w h e n one t e l ls a
n a r r a t i v e , t h e n one is a c t u a l l y r e a d i n g a s e r i e s of e v e n t s s y n c h r o n i c a l l y f r o m b e g i n n i n g to end, from top to bottom. But w h e n on e w i s h e s to u n d e r s t a n d the n a r r a t i v e s , t h e n one s h o u l d c o m p a r e the e v e n t s or r e l a t i o n s d i a c h r o n i c a l l y b e t w e e n one n a r r a t i v e and the other. In th e n a r r a t i v e s , the s e r i e s of e v e n t s or a c t i o n s is t e r m e d the p a r o 1e of the l a n g u a g e of myths, and th e r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n on e myth a n d a n o t h e r f o rms t. he 1 a n q u e of myt hs (L £v i -St r a uss 1972: 209 5 1979:187).
binary o p p o s i t i o n s are intrinsic to the process of hLiman t h o u g h t . I n evcar y myt h system t her e w i 11 be a
persistent presence of sequences of binary
discriminations, or oppositions. Any description of the w o I- 1 d , acc o r d i n g t a
L
e a c h , mus t s h a w re 1 a t. i o n s a r d iscriminations between categories in the form of "a is x " or "x is not a". A thing is seen to be alive or not alive, and one could not formulate the concept of "alive" except as the converse of "dead". In everymyths-s narrative then one can expect to find a
persistent sequence of binary discriminations, for
e x ample, as between human / nan-hu.ma n ,
n a t u r a l / s u p e r n a t u r a l , male/female, good/bad, life/death, and so on.
This persistent p r esence of oppositional relations in narratives is, according to Levi-Strauss (1972:226),
a form of Hegelian dialectic. According to the
dialectic an opposition in the narratives is often followed by a mediation between the opposing categories which leads to a resolution in the form of a syntheses. The mediation is achieved through an introduction of a third category, which is anomalous in terms of ordinary rational categories. That is why myths are full of
fabulous monsters, incarnate gods, anthropomorphic
1
the abnormal, the non.natural, or the supernatural which is regarded as sacred and h o i y , and which is typically the focus of all taboo and ritual observance.
The the nature of dialectics is more complex, for there are arguments differentiating between the contrary (i.e. the "p o 1arities af difference" such as between f ire/water ) , and cont rad i ct i on ( i . e .. cont ra dic t ory propositions such as the st atement of '' x is a and not a") which concerns states of oppositions which must be resolved in the narratives, and which the c r i t iques argue as important in understanding the situational context of the story (see Beckett 1975, Burridge 1967, Murphy 1972). However both Levi--Strauss and Hegel did not distinguish between the two. The distinetion between co n tra r y an d co n tr a dictor y oppositions, is important, according to Palmer (1981i102-103), because it leads to distinguishing the type of dialectic and syntheses involved. He adds:
contraries, if they become opposed through s a c i a 1 action, may be resolved by reconciliations. Contradict i o n s , ... must be resolved by the exclusion of both and the emergence through complete t r a n s formations of a new order of being.
This thesis is concerned most with the dialectic of contradictions, because the majority of the sampled narratives concern t ransformations as a form of r e s o 1u t i o n „
a s s o c i a t e d w i t h J a c o b s o n a n d H a l e (19565, b u. t i t s
a p p 1 i c a t i o n in a n t h r o p o 1o g y is a 1 1 r i b u t e d m a i n 1y to
L e v i - 3 1 r a u s s (1955). L 4 v i - St r a u s s ’ s rnode 1 h a s b e e n
a p p 1 ied by □ t h e r a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s u s i n g d i f f e r e n t b o d i e s
o f m y t h o l o g y , e.g. H e b r e w ( L e a c h 1962, 1966), M a o r i
(J a c k s o n 1968 ) , S i n h a l e s e ( R o b i n s o n 1968) , a n d N d e rn b u.
( T u r n e r 1974), a n d h a s b e e n a p p l i e d t o A u s t r a l i a n
A b o r i g i n a l m y t h s by n u m e r o u s w r i t e r s (see H i a t t 19 7 5
a n d B e r n d t a n d B e r n d t 1 9 3 8 f o r b i b l i o g r a p h i e s ) . U s e f u l
s u m m a r i e s , a p p l i c a t i o n s , a n d c r i t i q u e s of
L 4v i— S t r a u s s ’s t r e a t m e n t o f m y t h m a y be f o u n d in H a y e s a n d H a y e s (1970), L e a c h (1969, 1970), R o s s i (1974), a n d
N a t h h o r s t (1969).
A l t h o u g h m a n y a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s h a v e b e e n s y m p a t h e t i c
w i t h L & v i - S t r a u s s ’s o b j e c t i v e s in t h e s t u d y of myth,
B r i t i s h s o c i a 1 a nt h r o p o l o g i s ts ha ve c r i t i c i z e d h i s
m e t h o d s a n d c o n c l u s i o n s , w h i c h o f t e n s e e m to be
i n t u i t i v e l y d e r i v e d a n d d i f f i c u l t to v e r i f y (cf. C o h e n
1969, H a y e s a n d H a y e s 1970, L e a c h 1967). In t h e B r i t i s h
e m p i r i c a l t r a d i t i o n , W i l l i s ’ s w o r k s (1967, 1974)
r e p r e s e n t a n e x p l i c i t c h a l l e n g e t o L e v i - S t r a u s s ’s
m e t h o d s . W i l l i s s u g g e s t e d t h a t t h e a n a l y s i s of
m y t h o 1o g i c a 1 t ho u g h t n e e d not ; e s c h e w c o n c r e t e
et. h n o g r ap h i c d a t a a n d c a n be a c c o m m o d a t e d w i t h i n t he
n o r m a 1 p a r a m e t. e r s o f s o c i a 1 a n t h r o p o I o g i c a 1
i n v e s t igat i an (s e e Mi d d i e t o n 1 9 6 7 f o r ot. her e x a m p 1 e s of
a n a 1 y s i s i n t h i s t r a d i t i o n ) . N e v e r1 h e 1 e s s ,
e v e n a m o n g p e o p l e w h o do n ot w h o l l y a g r e e w i t h h is
a s s u m p t i ons, M a d d o c k ( 1 915:: 1 0 7 - 1 0 3 ) h as e m p h a s i ze d
t h a t t h e r e c a n n e v e r be a s i n g l e c o r r e c t or f i n a l
s t r u c t u r a l a n a l y s i s o f a n y m y t h s b e c a u s e t h e r e a r e
a 1 w a y s o t h e r p o ssi bi 1 i t i e s T h e po s i t. i v e a d v a n t a g e s i n stru.ctural a n a l y s i s is t h a t it n e e d not imp 1 y t a t a 1
c o m m i t m e n t t o a s i n g 1 e c a n c e p t u a 1 f r a m e o r a s i n g 1 e set o f p r o c e d u r e s . It c a n s t i m u l a t e a v a r i e t y of a p p r o a c h e s
t o n a r r a t i v e m a t e r i a. 1 s „
I n a. n a 1 y z i n g in y t h s , w o r k e r s u s u a 11 y s t a r t f r o m a
p r e s e l e c t e d s e r i e s u s e d as t h e b a s i s f a r t h e i r d e e p
s t r u c t u r a l a n a l y s i s of t h e m y t h s . H o w e v e r , R i c h a r d s
( 1 9 6 7 1 2 2 , g u o t e d in M a d d oc k 1 9 7 5 s 107) s a i d t hat t he
a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e ’p r i n c i p l e s w h i c h s e r v e a s a b a s i s
o f s t r u c t u r a l a n a l y s i s ’ d o e s not s e e m a b s o l u t e l y to
g u a r a n t e e t h a t t h e m y t h h a s not b e e n s o l i c i t e d t o
r e s p o n d to t h e a p r i o r i i d e a s o f t h e analyst.".
F u r t h e r , w h e n r e a d i n g t h e r e s u l t s o f a n y d e e p a n a l y s i s
of m y t h s , " t h e c h a n c e s o f o p e n i n g up at a p l a c e w h e n
t h e a n a l y s i s s e e m f r u i t f u l , i n c o n s e q u e n t i a l or h o p e l e s s
m i g h t be a b o u t e q u a l " ( H i a t t 1 9 7 5 : 1 7 ) , b e c a u s e t h e
s u c c e s s o f o n e a n a l y s i s a s c o m p a r e d w i t h a n o t h e r
d e p e n d s in s o m e m e a s u r e on t h e set o f m y t h s w h i c h is
c h o s e n f o r a n a l y s i s .
T h i s t h e s i s a t t e m p t s to m e e t s o m e o f t h e c r i t e r i a of
s t r u c t u r a l m e t h o d o l o g y by l o o k i n g i n t o t h e p a t t e r n i n g
of a b o d y o f m y t h s w h e n t h e y a r e a r r a n g e d r a n d o m l y e n
a b t a l n d if-fere n t r e s u 11 s f r o m a no t h e r p e r s o n a n a 1 y s i n g
t h e s a m e i'T'iyt.hs. M a d d o c k (1975: 107) r© rnar ks t h a t " it
d o e s n a t s © e m p o s s i b l e t o rn a k e t he s t r u c: t u r a 1 a n a 1 y s i s ,
a n d i n d e e d , it. m a y be d o u b t e d t h a t t h i s e v e r w i l l be
d o n e " . T h i s is m a i n l y du.e to t h e fact t hat, as
L 6v i -
S
t r a u s s hi m s e if ( i 9 6 4 s 11) p osi t e d , m y t h s in a y h a v e a n i n d e f i n 1 1 e n u m b e r of s t r u c t u r e s a n d n o n e w h ich m a ybe s a i d as t h e c o r r e c t s t r u c t u r e . Th u s , t h e a n a 1y s i s
a n d t h e i r t h e o r i e s c a n n o t c l a i m t o be d e f i n i t. i v e .
□ r i g i n a l l y , t h e d a t a a v a i 1 a b 1 e f or t h i s wo r k w a s
d e r i v e d f r o m W a t e r m a n ’ s (1978) T a 1e - t y p e I n d e x o f
A u s t r a 1 i a n A b o r i q i n a 1 G r a 1 Na r ra 11v es. In i t s he
c a t a l ä g e d 7 3 7 n a r r a tiv e s c o l l e c t e d at r a n d o m f r o m a 1 j. P a r t s o f A u s t r a i l a . F r o m t h e s e i t m a y b e s e e n t In at 9 0 p e r c e n t of t h e n a r r a t i v e s w e r e l i s t e d in t h e i n d e x
u n d e r a n i m a l a c t o r s . I h a v e u s e d t h i s li s t as t h e b a s i s
of t h i s p r o j e c t . T h i s p r o j e c t , then, is b a s i c a l l y a
s u r v e y of n a r r a t i v e s w i t h a n i m a l a c t o r s , r a t h e r t h a n
b e i n g c o n c e r n e d w i t h m o t i f - i n d e x e s w h i c h a r e v a r i a b l e
a n d i m m e n s e i n n u m b e r (W a t e r m a n ar b i t rar i 1 y d e f i ne d
her m o t i f - i n d e x n u m b e r i n g f o r t h e t a l e - t y p e s f r o m 1 t o
3 5 0 0 ) . F r o m t In is s e 1 e c t e d s a m p l e a l o n e t h e r e a r e 7 4
n a m e d s p e c i e s o f b i r d s , p r e s e n t in 3 2 8 n a r r a t i v e s , 2.2
n a m e d s p ec i e s o f rn a m m a l s in 188 n a r r a t i v e s , a n d a b o u t
22 s p e c i e s o f r e p t i l e s in 139 n a r r a 11v e s , all e i t h e r
n a r r a t i v e s .. T h e r e s t i n c 1 u de s o me p 1 a n t species, f i s h and m o l l u s c s , insects, or h u m a n actors. The real w o r l d uf the A b o r i g i n e s c e r t a i n 1y c o n t a l n s m o r e t h a n t h e s e , a n d t h e A b o r :i. g i n e s t h e rn s e 1 v es wo u 1 d c e r t a i n 1 y In .a v e k no w n mo re of t h e m . I n Ar nhem L a n d a 1 o n e ,
f
or examp
1
e,
t h e r e a re t h o u s a n d s of n a r r a t i v e s w h i c h c o n t a i n animal c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o ns, a l l e g o r i e s a n d rn e t a p h o r s i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h the s o c i a l c o n t e x t e m b e d d e d in them.T h e r e are t wo t h i n g s w h i c h are of intersst to t h i s s t u d y : th e a n i m a 1s t h e m s e l v es, and t he a 11e go rixat ion of the A b o r i g i n a l social c o n t e x t in the n a r r a t i v e s . A r i s i n g f r o m these, t h r e e m a i n q u e s t i o n s have f o r m e d th e f r a m e w o r k of t h i s survey. T h e first q u e s t i o n c: a n c e r n s w i t h t he n a r rati v es t h e m s elves: if " t h e p u r p o s e of the n a r r a t i v e s is to p r o v i de a 1o g i c a 1 mode 1 11 (LAv i - St r auss 1953 v. 443) wh i c h i s p r e s u m a b 1 y c a p a b l e of o v e r c o m i n g c o n t r a d i c t i o n s p r e s e n t e d in it, what t h e n a r e the c o n t r a d i c t i o n s w h i c h are most of
in the narrat i v e s : wh a t ar e t h e m a i n t h e m e s p r e s e n t e d i
r
t h i s s u. I"
v eye d s a m p i e s ,, a n d i n t h es
a rn pies □ f n a r r a t i v e s w i t h s o c i a 1 a c t i o n s what are the i d e a 1s of s qc i a 1 b e h a v i o r a n d r e 1 a t i □ n s p rese n t e d ? T h i s f r a rn e w o r k of q u e s t i o n s is i n t e n d e d to be c o n s i s t e n t wi t h Bern d t a n d B e r n d t s (1988s 4) . q u. a 1 i f i c a t i o n o f A b a r i g i. n a 1 nar r a t i v e s , and as a m e a n to e x a m i n e theiri n t e r p r e t a t i o n t h a t s
A bor i g i na 1 my t ho .1 og y , f o r a ny p a r t i c a 1 a r g r oup of A bar igina 1 p e o p 1e, wa s a nd is 1 ike a huge mirror t h a t r e f 1 e c t e d - s o me t i m e s d i rn 1 y , s o m e 11 m e s i n an e x a g g e r a t e d way, s o m e t i m es p h a n t a s m a g o r i c a l 1 y
10
B. The D a t a
Th e n a r r a t i v e s on w h i c h t h i s p r o j e c t is based c e n t r e o n a n i m a I s a s d r a rn a t i s p e r s o n a e » T h e s e a r e i n d e p e n d e n t n a r r a t i v e s w i t h o u t any r e f e r e n c e to length, d e g r e e of cqitsp 1 ex i ty ,, or sac redness. I n M a u s s 7 s t e r m s , t he a g e n t s a c t e d as s y m b o l s of the social r e l a t i o n s h i p w h i c h they re p r e s e n t in the nar r a tiv es, b e e a u s e th e y con den se w i t h i n t h e m s e l v e s the s t r u c t u r e of t h e s e r e l a t i o n s h i p s . M u n n (1970: 141) r e g a r d s t h e m as iconic or e x p r e s s i v e s y m b o l s of t h e s e r e l a t i o n s h i p s .
Ma ny st u d i e s of A b o r i g i n a 1 n a rr a 1 1v e s ha ve f o e u s e d on t h e d e s c r i p t i v e asp e c t an the f u n c t i o n of m y t h s and
the r o 1e of myths
within
the
context
of
Aborigina1
r e l i g i o n a n d ritual. O t her works, s u c h as t h o s e by W i l p e e r t (1970) a n d W a t e r m a n (1978) h a v e a t t e m p t e d to e x a m i n e in g e n e r a l the d i s t r i b u t i o n a nd o r d e r i n g of a w i de s e 1e c t i o n of Ab o r i g i n a 1 t a 1 e s . W a t e r m a n 7 s c o l l e c t i o n in p a r t i c u l a r has p r o v i d e d a wi d e s a m p l e ofr e p r e s e n t a t i v e data on A b o r i g i n a l n a r r a t i v e s in w h ich 737 oral n a r r a t i v e s , p r e v i o u s l y c o l l e c t e d by v a r i o u s w o r k e r s over a s p a n of o n e h u n d r e d years, are listed.
In W a t e r m a n ’s v i e w , the n arratives c o u 1d not be c l a s s i f i e d a c c o r d i n g t a Aar ne a n d T h a rn p s a n s (19 61) c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of a n i m a l tales, o r d i n a r y t a l e s and
the U n iverse and these that pertain to Ordinary Tales, N a r r a t i v e s o f t h e f i r s t s u p e r c 1 a s s w a s d i v i d e d i n t o
classes with motifs of the nature of the earth,
celest i a 1 phenornena, t he first h u m a n s , t he creatar s , a n d t h. e e s t a b 1 i s h m e n t o f e n v i r a n m e n t a n d c u 11 u. r e T h e sec gn d supe r cI ass was dividea into cl asses of narratives with motifs of c a n n i ba
1
s , heroes t ri
c: kster s , d i s agreeme n ts an
d
c o n t e s t s ,1
e chery
encaunt.er s w it
h sp i r i ts a n d st r anger s , and ot her t a .1 e s , But o t h e r w o r k e r s s u c h as Mill e r and Wundt have p r o p o s e d that A a r n e - T h o m □ s o n ’s• s c h e m e is a p p 1 i c a b 1e h o w e v e r s e e m i n g l y s u p e r f i c i a l , b e c a u s e in A b o r i g i n a l nar r at i ve s sLic h a cor r e s p o n d e n c e b e t w e e n t he dr amat i s p e r s o n a e in th e s t o r i a s and the c 1a s s i f i c a t ion sche m e daes ey, ist (c f . Pr app 1975: 5-6, 16)The classification of anima1 t a 1es into
any
syste
m of narratives will remain problematic. This is so first, because in Aboriginal tales there is a constant unity of, and Iransformaticns between, h um an /non-humanor culture/nature, so that these phenomena cannot
easily be demarcated. Second, in Aboriginal narratives t here are many f a n t a s 11c beings and event.s i n wh i ch
C. Q u a l i f y i n g t h e D a t a
H e0 ü i n g t h e o m n i - p r s s e n t d i f f i c u 11 y o f d e t e r m i n i n g
w h e t h e r t h e d r a m a t i s p e r s o n a e a r e p e o p 1e o r a n i m a 1s , i t
w as p r o p o s e d t o u s e t h e f o l l o w i n g q u a l i f i c a t i o n s f o r
s s 1 a c 11 ng w h i c h na.r r a t i v e was t o be i nc: I u d e d f o r
a n a 1y s i s ,
T h e f i r s t s t e p was t o a r r a n g e t h e n a r r a t i v e s
a c c . or d i n g t
a
t he named c 1 a s s e s a n d s p e c i e s o f t hed r a m a t i s p e r s o n a e . I t was d e t e r m i n e d t h a t o n l y w h e r e a
n a m e d s p e c i a s p I a y e d a m a j o r r o I e i n a n a r r a t i v e w a s
i t t o be i n c l u d e d f o r a n a l y s i s . O t h e r s p e c i e s a p p e a r
i n WSiter marT s i n d e x s u c h a s mol l u s c s , i n s e c t s , a n d
p l a n t s . H o w e v e r , a f t e r c r o s s r e f e r e n c i n g t hem t o t h e
n a r r a t i v e s , i t was d i s c o v e r e d t h a t t h e s e a n i m a l s d i d
n o t t a k e p a r t a s d r a m a t i s p e r s o n a e s o t h a t t h e y w e r e
e x c l u d e d . " A n i m a l s " i n t h i s a n a l y s i s i n c l u d e a l l named
b i r d s , m a mm al s , a n d r e p t i l e s p e c i e s i n t h e i n d e x . T h i s
t e r m i s u s e d t o a v o i d c o n f u s i o n w i t h t h e t e r m u s e d by
o t h e r w o r k e r s , w h e r e " a n i m a l s " o n l y r e f e r r e d t o
rnamma l s a n d i s s e p a r a t e d f rorn b i r d s , r e p t i 1 e s a n d o t hier
c l a s s e s ( e . g . S m i t h 1 9 7 0 ; 1 9 ; W a t e r m a n 19 7 3 s 3 3 0 f f . > .
When t h e d e f i n e d a n i m a l s p e c i e s h a d b e e n s e l e c t e d ,
i t was c r o s s r e f e r e n c e d a n d c o m p a r e d w i t h t h e r o l e o f
t h e n a m e d s p e c i e s i n W a t e r rn a n s t a l e - 1 y p e 1 i s 11 n g ..
W h e r e s t o r i e s a r e m a . i n l y c o n c e r n e d w i t h human a c t o r s
a n d it r e f l e c t s t h e i r b e h a v i o r a n d / o r t h e a n i m a l ’s
r 01 a 11 □ n s w i t h o t h 0r a g e n t s t h 0n i t i s i n c 1 u d 0cl i n t h 0
list.. H o w e v e r , in m a n y c a s e s t h e n a m e d a n i m a l s l i s t e d
in W a t e r m a n ’s n a r r a t i v e s c o u l d not all be t r a c e d a n d
i n c 1 u d e d i n t h i s s u r v e y , p a r t i c u 1 a r 1 y w h e n t h 0
-F o 1 1 o w 1 n g a p p i l e d s t h 0 a n 1 m a 1 1 i s t e d in t h e i n d 0 c o u 1 d
not. b e f o u n d in a n y of t h e n a r r a t i v e s ; t h e n a r r a t i v e s
d i d n o t ment. i o n e d a n y a n i m a 1 c r a s s r e f erencecl f r a m t he
inde x ; t h e n a m e d s p e c i e s is m i s i d e n t i f i e d in t h e
nar r at i v e s ; t hie ani ma 1 i n t h e nar rat i v e s is ciep i c t e d
gn 1y as a b y s t a n d e r or a v i c t i m o f a n a c t i v11 y , s u c h as h u n t i n g ; or t h e a n i m a l is not a n a g e n t in t h e s t o r y .
F r a m t he t o t a l of 7 3 7 n a r r a 11 v e s , 6 5 5 of t h e m
merit i o n o n e or m o r e n a m e d a n i m a 1 s p e c i e s i n e a c h
n a r r a t i v e , 0 r i g 1 n.a 1 1 y , t. h e r e w e r e 7 4 s p e c i e s o f b i r ds
m e n 11 o n e d in 3 2 8 n a r r a t i v es, 2 2 s p e c i e s o f m a m rn a l s i n
133 n a r r a t i v e s , a n d a b o u t 20 s p e c i e s of r e p t i l e s in 13?
n a r r a t i v e s , all of w h i c h w e r e m e n t i o n e d e i t h e r in
p a s s i n g or p 1 a y e d a n 1m p o r t a nt p a r t as d r a m a t i s
p e r s o n a e . F r o m t h is s u. r v e y , a ft e r 0 x a rn i n i n g t h e
n a r r a t i v e s a c c o r d i n g to a b o v e q u a l i f i c a t i o n s , 2 9 5
s a 1T1p 1 e d n a r r a t i v e s w e r e t a k e n f o r f u r t. h e r a n a 1 y s i s ,
t h i s i n c l u d e d 67 n a m e d s p e c i e s of b i r d s in 158
n a r r a t i v e s , 2 2 s p e c i e s o f m a m m a l s in 3 6 n a r r a t i v e s , a n d
15 s p e c i e s of r e p t i l e s 1n 4 5 n a r r a 11v e s
14
neither
as
sacred/inside
nor
as
non-sacred/outside
er s i o n , a11hough these distinc1
1□ ns were recognized by
t h
e A
b
gI- l g i n
e
s -
This
i s
b
e
c
a
u
s
e
W
a
t
s
r
m
a
n
c
a
u 1 d
ra
t
d
e
t.
e
r
fTi.
!
.
n
e s
u
c h d i s
t i n
c
t i a
n
s f
r
a
m h
e
r o
r i q i n
a I m
a
t
e
r i a 1.
F u r t h e r , t hen
ar
r a t i v e s w e r' e n a t g roup
e d i n t o c a t e g o r i e s ofmy
t h s , 1e g en
ds,
or ta1
es ,
a .1. though
such t e r ms
a r e recog n i zed by long u s a g e in the field O i~fa 1k 1
gre s
t
udies»
D.
Inside, Outside
In
Aboriginal
society,
there
are
multi-level
"inside" and "outside" forms of narratives
^
The
inside
v
e
r
s i o
n
s ,
,
e
s
peci a 11 y ,
are intrinsi c a 11 y c
□
n
n
sets
d
w i t h
r
e 1 ig io
u.
s b
e 1 i e f
s a
n
d w i t h A
b
o
r
ig i n
a 1 w
issensc:
haft
a
n
d
we 1.1 ansc hauunq » Their’
beliefs, r i tu
a
Is,
an
d
m
y
t h
s
operate at different levels of secrecy
beginning
From
"out
side"
or
camp
versions,
t
o
"inside"
o
r
secret-sacred
form-
Children,
especialy
males,
gra
dually 1e
a
rn public v
ersions of nar ra
tives, a
nd wit h
the growth of age and the passing of various initiation
rites, they are
given
more
access
to
secret-sacred
versions of
narratives
which
are
more
esoteric
in
nature.
A 11
t h i s
f
o
r
m
s
p
art
of
t h
a
b
as ic
o
u.
1 1 o
o
k
o
f
Aborigina1 i
-
■
e 1 igion.
Myths form
the
body
of
verba1
expression,
and
the
ceremonies and
rites
are
the
5-e x t 5-e n d 5-e d o r g a n i z e d b e h a v i o r w h i c h e x p r e s s e d m y t h s ,
a 1 b e i t i n c o m p 1 s x a n d in d i r e c t w a y s . In t h i s a c t i v i t y ,
m a t e r i a l o b j e c t s or o t h e r f o r m s o f p h y s i c a l
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a r e u s e d to s y m b o l i s e c e r t a i n t o t e m i c
sp ec ies, sp i r i t. s or a n c e s t r a 1 be i ng s ; a 1 1 w h i c h m a y be
p e r f o r m e d at s i t e s w h i c h are? t h e c o u n t r y a s s o c i a t e d
wi t h v a r i o u s t o t e m i c bei n g s , u s u a l l y 1 o c a 1 1 a n d m a r k s ,
b e c a u s e m o s t of A b o r i g i n a l m y t h s a n d r i t u a l s a r e to
soiiie ex t e n t a 1 w a y s l o c a l i z e d (B e r ndt a n d B e r ndt
1 ? 65:: 198:; 1 9 8 8 s 5 -■ 6, 1 1 -14) . All t h e s e a c t i v i t i e s m u s t
o p e r a t e on a g r a d e d l e v e l f r o m t h e " o u t s i d e " p u b l i c
f o r m t o t h e " i n s i d e " s e c r e t v e r s i o n s .
M y t h s a n d r i t u a l s ar e m u t u all y c o m p 1 i m e n t a r y . R i t u a 1
a c t s o u t t h e e v e n t s or i n s t r u c t i o n s e m b e d d e d in t h e
n a r r a t i v e s „ a n d i n t u. r n t h e m y t h j u s t i f i e s ar
e x p l i c a t e t h e w h o l e r a n g e o f r i t u a l s . T h e s e myth s ,
then, t i e p e o p l e to t h e n a t u r a l a n d t h e s u p e r n a t u r a l
w o r l d in o n e c o h e r e n t u n i t .
E.
Methodology
As s t a t e d e a r l i e r , m y t h s c o n s i s t of s y n t a g m a t i c c h a i n s
of r e l a t e d u n i t s or e l e m e n t s . T h e s e a r e o f t e n
r e p e t i t i v e a n d r e d u n d a n t . L 6v i - S t r a u s s (1955, 1979)
s t r e s s e d t h a t t h e a n a l y s i s of m y t h s is not o n l y
c har ac t.ar i z e d by r e a d i ng i t i n sy nt a g m a t ic t e r m s , but
e 1 a t i gn s b e t w e e n t h e rn 0a n i n g f u 1 u. n i t. s i n t h 0
n a r r a t i v e s . T h e s u p p o r t i n g p o p u l a t i o n w h i c h is
a c t u. a 11 y 1 n v o 1 v e d i n n a r r a t i n g , 11 s 10n i n g , a n d
p s r f or i'tj i ng t h e n a r r a t i v e s , m a y be u n c o n s c i o u s o f t h e r e 1 a t i. o n s h i. p s b e t w e e n t h o s e u n 11 s i n t h e
m
y t h s ,, e v er.
t h o u g h t !"ie y a r e s 0m a n 11 c a 11 y r 1 c h ..
T h e b a s i c r e l a t i o n s h i p p r e s e n t in t h e n a r r a t i v e s a r e
u s Li a 11 y p r e s e n t e d i n a f o r m a t o f p r o p a r t i o n s as:
a / n o t a b o b / n o t
Ta r e a c h s u c h a f o r m u 1a 11on, c e r t a i n c o n d i t i o n s m u s t be
m e t ( G r e i m a s 1 9 7 2 : 1 6 2 - 1 7 0 ) :
a ) T h e a n a 1 y s i s m u s t r e d u c e t h e :i. n f o r m a t ion i n t o
s m a l l e r u n i t s o-f s i g n i f i c a n c e a n d d e f i n e t h e
c o n s t i t u e n t u n i t s f or e a c h n a r r a t i v e t h a t a r e to be
c o m p a r e d . B e c a u s e t h e n a r r a t i v e s u s e d in t h i s w o r k a r e
t a k e n at r a n d o m , for t h e p r a c t i c a l p u r p o s e o f a n a l y s i s ,
t h e c o n s t i t u e n t s h a v e b e e n d i v i d e d i n t o t w o t y p e s : t h a t
is, s p e c i f i c c o n s t i t u e n t s f o r t h e a n a 1 y s i s o f s e p a r a t. e
na r r a t i v e s , a n d m a i n n ar r a
t
iv e c o n s 1 1 1u e n 15„ T h es p e c if ic c o n s t i t u e n t s c o n s i st of t he clramat is p e r5c n a e
(t h e rn a i n a c t o r ) , o t h e r a g e n t s (c o - a c t o r s > , e v e n t s a n d
i s s u e s , a n d t h e r e s o 1 u. t i o n o r m o r a 1 a c t i o n p r e sent, e d i n
e a c h n a r r a t i v e .. T h e m a 1 n c o n s t i t u e n t s a r e t h e b a s i c a n d
c o n s t a n t t h e m e o f t h e n a r r a t i v e a n d its s i t u a t i o n a l
e v e n t s , a n d
t
h e v a r i a b 1 e ey,
p 1 a n a t o r y a 1 e m e n t s i - e »to) T h e u n i t s o f s i g n i F i c a n c e s h o u. I d to a r r a n g e d n a. 1 1near r e 1 a t i o n a 1 5y s 10m . In the ana 1y s i s in this work., e a c h pair of s i m i l a r or d i s s i m i l a r u n its p r e s e n t e d in e a c h n a r r a t i v e is compared., Most often t h e u n i t s a re present, i m p l i c i t l y an d explicitly., in b i n a r y o p p o s i t i o n a l forms» B e c a u s e one of th e s t a t e d p r o b 1 e m s i s t o 1 o ok f o r t h e m a s t r e c u r r e n t a p p o s i t i o r. 5 , c a n t r a d i c 1.1 o n s , or contrast.s p r e s e n t i n a 11 t h e samp led
n a r r a t i v e s, t h e s e bin a r y u n :i. t s h a v e to to e p r e s ante d i n su c h a w a y so that t h e y m a y be c o m p a r e d b e t w e e n all the r 1ar r at :i. ves. Qne way □ f doing this is to s p e d f y t he t y p e s of b i n a r y u n i t s an d put them in a c o d e d re g i s t e r form so that t h e y may be p r e s e n t e d and c o m p a r e d as c o n s t a n t u n i t s for all th e s u r v e y e d samples.
a n a l y t i c a l c o n s t i t u e n t s to the m a i n n a r r a t i v e :::: o
n
t t u e n t , a 3. 1 t h s b n a r y o r m s an
d t h e i r i n t e r p r e t a t i v e r e l a t i o n s m a y be c o r r e l a t e d t o g e t h e r ina g
e ne
r a 1 i z e d f a r m u. 1 a t i o n a. s :A / not A y2.. B / n o t B yg C / not C ? and so on.
M
y
th
, t h e n „ a srn
e t a langu.
aq
e
,, m a y b e d e s c r.
1
b e d b a s e□
on s e l e c t e d u n i t s of a n a l y s i s or " u n i t s of m e a s u r e m e n t ’'A. Approaches to the Study of Narratives
T h e n o t i o n t h a t A b □ r i g i n a 1 m y t h s a r e i n m a n y w a y s u n t r u e a nd a b s u r d is n a i v e an d s h o w s m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o-F i ts natu.re. Suc h a v i e w , w h i c h d a t e s as far bac k to the 19th c e n tury, still finds s o m e e x p r e s s i o n t o d a y in th e p o p u l a r m i n d of A u s t r a l i a , and might well be p r e s e n t e d b y S c h u r m a n ? s v i e w (q u o t e d i n W o c d s 1879 s 2 4 1 ) s
The n a t i v e s have m a n y m o r e s i m i l a r t a l e s among t h e m ; t h e a b o v e h o w e v e r , w h i c h s e e s t a poss e s more of an i n t e r e s t t h a n an y of t h e rest, will be su-f f i c i ent to sh o w t he i r m o n s t r ou s an d i n e v ery r e s p e c t r i d i c u l o u s c h a r a c t e r .
In m y t h s , a c c o r d i n g to M i d d l e t o n (196 7) , it is that s e e m i n g 1y r i d i e u 1ous u n t r u t h w h i c h b e c o m e s tha de f i n i n g c in a r a c t e r istic. Here, t r u t h i s i r r e 1 e v a n t , b e c a u s e myth, as the e m b o d i m e n t o-f r e l i g i o u s e x p r e s s i o n , is i t s e I f t h e t r u t h . T h e u n r e a 1 w o r 1 d
a
f t h e A ba
r i g i n a 1 D r e a m i n g m y t h s is the w o r l d w h i c h c o n t a i n e d all their ■fundamental t r u t h s (of. M o r t o n 1985 s 80-95) . As such, a my t n i s a s t at eme n t a bout soc i a t y a n d p eop 1 e s p 1 ac e i n20
s t a t eme n t i s a x p r e s s a d i n s y m b o 1 i c t a r ms a n d a n i Vi p c!'_ t a n t a n t h r o p □ 1 o g i c a 1 p r □ b 1 a m b e c □ m& a o n a c f a n d a r s t a n d i n g t h e r a a 1 i t y t h a t t h a s t a t a m a n t s 3 y iTi b O 1 1 — © «
I n g a n a r a 1, a n t h r o p a l o g i s t s h a v e a p p rqa c h e d m y t h s a n d s y m b o l s a s c u l t u r a l p h e n o m e n a , o r i n D u r k e h e i m ’ s t e r m s “ c o l l e c t i v e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s 11 o r " s o c i a l f a c t s " . T h e u n d e i- 1 y i n g i rn p 1 i c a t i c n o f t h i s v i e w i s t h a t m y t h s a n d c o s m o l o g i c a 1 n o t i a n s s m b a d d e d i n t h e m a r e n o t m e r e
•f a i r y t a 1 e s , e x a t i c a n d q u a i n t e x p r e s s : o n o f a p r i m i t i v e m e n t a l i t y , r a t h e r , t h e y a r e s t a t e m e n t s w h i c h w e r e rn a d e d e 1 i b e r a t e 1 y b y t h e p e o p l e who t e l l t h e m.
T h e r e h a v e b e e n s e v e r a 1 ■ w a y s i n w h i e h a n t h r o p o 1o g i s t s h a v e t r i e d t o e x p l i c a t e t h e p r a b 1em o f t h e s a s y m b o 1 i c s t a t e m e n t s . T y l o r ( 1 8 7 3 ) a n d F r a z e r ( 1 9 3 3 ) , r e p r e s e n t i n g e a r l y i n t e l l e c t u a l i s t s , s a w m y t h s a s e x p r e s s i n g t h e h a l f - f o r g o t t e n o r i g i n s o f m a n k i n d , t h e o r i g i n o f n a t u r e a n d e v e n t s t h a t o c c u r r e d i n h i s t o r y . A l t h o u g h t h i s a p p r o a c h h a s b e e n o u t m o d e d , i t p r o v i d e d a n o b v i o u s t r u t h o f a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e s t h a t m y t h s a r e c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e
: - el a t i o n s h i p s o f m a n w i t h m a n , rn a n w 11 h n a t u r e , a n d rn a n
w i t h t h e s u p e r n a t u r a 1.
I h e e v o 1u t i o n i s t a n d f u n c t x o n a l i s t s c h o o l s o f D u r k h e i m, R a d c 1 i f f e ~ B r o w n a n d E v a n s - P r i c h a r d a r e i rnp a r t a n t i n t h a t t h e y f o r me d a k i n d o f h i s t o r i c a 1
b !•■' i d g e w 11 h t h e p r e v i o u s c o n c e p t i o n s o n t h e n a t u r e o f
t h e o r e t i c a l c o n c e r n s w e r e being w o r k e d o u t „ For e x a m p l e W e ber s •’ s (1947) exp 1 or a t i on o f t he re 1 a t ionsh i p b e t w e e n s c o n o m i c and r s 1 i g i □ us i n s t i t u t i o n s and his r e c o g n 1 1 1 o n of th e i m p o r t a n c e of t h e p r o b l e m of meaning, or F r e u d ' s p s y c h o a n a l y t i c i n s i g h t s on the r e l a t i o n s h i p of re 1 ig ious t h o u g h t a n d ernot ions to u n c o n s c ious mgtiv a t i a n s a nd the t rea tm e n t of r e 1 igio n as a p r o j e c t i v e syst e m . H o w e v er, E v a n s -Prio ha rd < 1965) p o a i t e d t h a t t h e e x p 1 a n a t i o n o f r e 1 i g i o n b a s e d p u r e 1 y on the s o c i o l o g i c a 1 (as r e p r e s e n t e d by w o r k s of Weber and P a r s o n s ) or p s y c h o l o g i c a 1 <as r e p r e s e n t e d by w o r k s of F r e u d an d Roheirn) is ina d e q u a t e . He stressed, r a t it e r , t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f belief, m e a n i n g , a n d i n t s r p r e t a t i o n in the s t u d y of m y t h s an d r e 1 i g i c n , A g r o w i n g a w a r e n e s s of t h i s c o n c e p t i o n of the ''‘s o c i o l o g y of ideas" a n d fu r the r un d e r st a n d i n g of the m a n n e r in w h i c h t h e s e soc i a l ideas are t r a n s m i t t e d have p r o d u c e d many w o r k s on myths, r i t u a l , religion, and s y m b o 1 i s m , T u !•"ner (1975) has pravi ded an i n dept h o v e r v iew of t he recent d i r e c t i o n in the fieId, and his a t her w o r k s ' 1967,, 1969, 1974) hi a v e p r o v i d e d v a 1 u a b 1 e c a n t r i b u t i o n to t h i s field,
(1973), an d Mu.nn (1973)» Whi le w o r k s by D o u g l a s (1970, 1 9''r5) an d N e e d h a m (1973) r ep r e s e n t i n~d s p t h i n v e s t i g a t i o n s into the role of s y m b o l s in social life, a n d L e a c h (1979) has p r o v i d e d a s u m m a r y of the general s t r u c t u r a 1 ist m e t h o d s to t h e f i e i d of m y t h o I o g y . W o r k s by M a u s s (1954),, L e v i - S t r a u s s (1963, 1966,, 1969,, and o t h e r s ), a n d L s a c h (1954, 1976, 1979) havs further s t i m u 1 a t e d t h e f i e 1 d o f a n t h r o p o 1 o g y o f r e 1 i g i o n , p a r t i c u l a r l y on a s p e c t s of m y t h s an d ritual by o f f e r i n g
n o V e 1 an d p r
a
v o c a t i v e p e r s p e c t i v es. T h i s s t r u c t u r a l l s t a p p r o a c h r e g a r d s m y t h s as a m e a n s of e x p l a i n i n g the p a r a d o x e s o f soc i a 1a
r d e r w i t h i n e x t r a - so c i a 1 c haa
s , t h e p a r a d □ x e s o f t h e r e 1 a t i o n s h i p s o f a u t h o r i t y , p o w e r ,, kinship, e t c .Th :i. s g r aw i ng f i e l d of sy rn bo 1 i c ana 1 y s i s i n a n t h r o p o l o g y c o v e r s a w i d e r a n g e of a p p r o a c h e s v a r y i n g f r orn t he i nt er p r et at i on . of the r o 1 e of c u 11 u r a 1 sy m bo 1 s in s o c i a 1 life as p r e s e n t s d by T u r n e r and Geertz (1960;, 1964, 1963), t o t h e a n a 1 y sis
a
f t h e s e l f - c o n t a i n e d logic of s y m b o 1 ic s y s t e m s as e x e m p 1 ified by L e v i - S t r a u s s and others. O t h e r a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s have t u r n e d t o d i f f e r e n t f i e l d s s u c h a s p h i 1 o s o p h y ,, p s y c h o i o g y , 1 i t e r a r y cr i t ic isrn, aest hetics, i nf ormat ion t h e o r y , s e m i o t i c s , a n d 1 i n g u i s 11 c s t o g a i n d i f f e r e n t p e r s p e c t i v e s into the a n a l y s i s of s y m b o l s and m y t h s and t h e i r u s e s .n e d i a t i n g a g e n t o f c u i t u r a 1 t r a n s rn i s 3 1 □ n , M o s t □ f t h e s e , however, c o n c e r n the s i g n i f i c a n c e of b e s t i a r i e s an d t h e1r s y m b a i i c m e a n i n g s w i t h1n W e s t e r n s o c ist 1e s . Nevertheless., t h e s e w o r k s i n d i c a t e a p e r e n n i a l interest
1 n a n i m a 1 s a n d t h e 1 r s y m b a 1 ism. M □ s t n o t a b 1 e a m an g t hi e m a r e s t u d i a s b y M c C u 11 o c h (1 ? 6 0) , W h 11 e < 19 5 4) „ a n d r e c e n 1 1 y b y R o w 1 a n d (1974) w h i c hi 1 a a k i n t a v a r i o u s rn y t h s a n d 1 e q e n d s a b o u t a n 1 m a I s a n d t h e i r r o 1 e s a s t h e y w e r e p e r c e i v e d in the M i d d l e Ages, a n d c o n t i n u i t i e s in
t h e 1 r s i g n i f i c a n c e t c t h e p r e s e n t 11 m e
S t u d i e s con the i n d i v i d u a l role of a n i m a l s have been done by J a n s e n (1952) wh o i n v e s t i g a t e d the role o f apes (2ur i ng t he Mi d d l e A g e s an d t he R e n a i s s a n c e . Leac h (19 6 i ) 1n v e s tig at e d t he 1o re a nd c o s m o 1o g i c a 1 sig n i f i e a n c e af the dag, w h i l e a s i m i 1 a r s t u d y on the r o 1e of p c n i e s was fa rw a r d e d by Dent (1962).
The social r e l a t i o n s an d s i g n i f i c a n c e of a n i m a l s hi a v e a iso be e n 1 o o k e d into. !._ea c h (1964) h a s m a d e a s t u d y of 1 i n g u i s t ic t a b o o s b a s e d o n s y m b o l i c a n i m a 1 c at eg or ies a n d var i ous ve r ba 1 o b s c e n i t i es r e 1 -at e d t o them, and t he social va 1 uat ions of var ious an i m a .1 s as p s r c e i v e d by W e s t e r n people. L o n d s d a l e ’s (1981) study f o c u s e s m o r e on a n1m a 1s as p r a g e n i t o r s of d a n c e in v a r i o u s a n c i e n t and e t h n o g r a p h i c s o c i e t i e s as r e f l e c t e d t h !'"a u g h t h e 1 r a r t „ 1 o r e s , a n d m y t h s . W i l l i s (197 4)
24
(1964, 1967). O t h e r s t u d i e s of a n i m a l s y m b o l i s m in Afi- ican s o c i e t i e s h a v e be e n done by T u r n e r (1962), who
i n v a s 11 g a t e d a n i m a 1 s i n t h e c □ n t e x t o f h u n 11 n g r 11 u a 1 s a m o n g t h e N d e m b u h u n t e r s of R o d h e s i a , and by Bei del man (1967) w h o looke d in t o t he soci a 1 s i g n i f i c a n ce of hyena a n d t h e r a b b i t a m o n g t h e B a n t u af E a s t A f r i c a . N e e d h a m (19 67) h a s s t u d i e d m o c k e r y a f a n i m a 1 s a m o n g t h e P e n a n a n d Gernang B u s h m e n or K a l i m a n t a n in Indonesia. Other exp o s11 i o n s o n t he us e of a n i m als in s y m b o l i c c 1 a s s i f i c a t i o n m a y b e e e m p 1 i f i e d b y B u 1 m e r s (1967) s t u d y of the c a s s o w a r y in Irian, T a m b i a i V s (1969) s t u d y on c u l t u r a l p e r c e p t ions t o w a r d s a n i m a l s in Thailand, and L 4v i - Gtr aus s ’s (1962) ana 1y si s of abo r i g i n a 1
'•'sc ience of t he c o n c r e t e " and t he 1 agio of t o t e m ic c l a s s i f i c a t i o n in v a r i o u s N o r t h A m e r i c a n Indian c u l t u r e s .
S y m b o l i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s of a n i m a l s in A u s t r a l i a n A bo r i g m a l soc i et y have been s t u d i e d by va r i ou s p eop 1 e . Radc 1 if f e - B r o w n (1951) saw th e use of an i rna 1 spec i es as t hi e y a r e p r e s e n t i n A b o r i g i n a 1 t □ t e m l s m a n d n a r r a t i v e s y s t e m s as of so me t hln g that is of s y m b o 11c
af nar r a 11 v e s wi t h ernus as th e d r a m a t is per s o n a e . He p o s i t e d t h a t t h e p r e s e n c e in m a n y m y t h s of e m u s in r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h o t h e r b i rds i n d i c a t e s a d e s i r e for a r e s o 1 u t i o n o f t h e d i f F i c u 11 y a f D a 1 a b o n t h o u g h t a b o u. t th e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of emu. (a f l i g h t l e s s bird) and birds t h a t fly» E l s e w h e r e , Ma d dock (.1970) has p o s i t e d that
A
b o r i q i n e s f r e q u e n 1 1 y a 11. r i b u t e c u. i t u r a 11 y c r e a t i v e r o l e s (such as th e i n v e n t i o n of fire) to animals, while th e p e o p 1e the m s e i v es a re r eg a r de d as pa s s i v e inn ov at o r s c o n c e r n e d m a i n 1y w i t h t h e m a i n te n anc e of t he 3.r t r ad it i a n s . B l o w s (1975) r s e v a 1 u.ated the r o 1 e cf e a g l e h a w k and c r o w in m y t h s and p o s i t e d that the c o n f l i c t b e t w e e n the t w o s p e c i e s s y m b o l i z e d a26
L
e
n
t !
■
'
a 3
.
A
u
s
t r a I i a
n A
b
o
r igi n
a. I c
as
m
o 1 o
g
y ,
;
a a h
y
( 1939) h a s a d i t a d w o r k s c: o n c a rn
in
g t h e t h e m e jf how p e o p l e have r e p r e s e n t e d a n i m a l s n their art. T h i s book c o n v e y s s t a g e s in th e p r o c e s s of i n t e r p r e t i n g art a n d i n c l u d e a r t i c l e s on i d e n t i f y i n g images of thea
r t , h □ w a r t e n c o d e s rn e a n i n g ,, r e 1 a t i o n s h i p s b e t w e e n i m a g e s a n d c o m p o s i t i o n s , th e m e a n i n gof
the animal im a ge s , a n d t h e c o m pas i t i o n of a w i d e r c u 11 u r a 1 sys t e m . U c k o a n d R a s e n f e l d (19673 have p r e v i o u s l y d e s c r i b e d the::::amp 1 ex n a t u r e of h u m a n /a n i m a 1 re 1 a 11o n s h i p s in P a 3. e o 1 i t h i c c a v e art a n d t. h e y h a v e e x a m i n e d t h a t
s p e c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of e x p r e s s i o n t h r o u g h art,,
M o s t recen1.1 y , t h r e e ed i ted wor ks have c o m e out " as the r e s u 11 af W o r 1d A r
ch a e c 1c q
ica 1
C on g r e s s i9 S 7, in 3 aut h a m p t o n , Eng 1 a n d , by C 1 u t t o n - B r oc k (1938) , I ngo 3. d(3.9 8 9 3 ,, a r. d W111 i s < 1990) . C 1 u 11. c n - B r o c k e d i t e d t h e
v o 1u m e an t he t hem e of t he a p p rap r i a tion, d o m i n a tion, and e x p 1o i t a t i o n of a n i m a Is. 11 e x a m i n e s an d st resses t h e c r i t i c a l l y i m p o r t a n t e c o l o g i c a l b a l a n c e b e t w e e n h Li m a n s a n d thei r a n i rn a 1 f c o d s i n v a
r
i o u s pi a c e s a n dtime per i
o d s . I ngo 1 d ’
s v
oi u.me conce
r ns t he s i g n i f i c
ancs
of animals to humans,
and emphasizes that
a
cl ear--cut
d i v i s i o
n o
f t
h
e t h
e w
o
r 1 c! i n
t
a h
u
m
a
n
s
a
n
d
a
n i
m
a 1 s
o
n
the basis of simple economic or attitudinal criteria is
1 i k
e 1 y t
o b
e a s
e
r i o
u
s o
v
e
r s i m
p 1 i f i c
a
t i o
n o
f t h
e a
c
t
u
a 1
situations to be? found
in
any
cultural
system,.
The
•
/
'
o 1 ume e d
11ed by
Uii 11 is
represents
a
range
of
new
r e l e v a n t far a r c h a e o l o g i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , and it c h a 11 a n g e s a r c h a e o 1 ag i a t a t o r e c o n s
i
d e r the! rrn
a ter i a 1 „id
a
ny o
f t h a p a p e r si
n W ill! s s edi ti
o n r a v aa
1 t h ec □ m p il a x i 11 a a o f c o n c a p t s a b o u t t h e h u m a n f o r m a n d h u m a n
n a t u. r e a n d t h e i r a s s u m s d r e 1 a t i a n s h :i. p s w
;
i
.
t h n a n ~ h u. m a n / a n i m a 1 f o r m s a n d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . 3 u c h c o m p i e x11 i e a a re □ f t e n m a de e x p 1 icit in m y t h a ndr i t u a 1, a n d t hi e r e f o r e d e m a n d t h a t a r c h a e o 1 o g i s t a r e c o g n i z e the d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n r i g o u r in their m e t h o d o l o g y w h i c h o n l y f o c u s e s on th e m a t e r i a l e v i d e n c e and t h e i n t r i c a c i e s and c o m p l e x i t i e s of the i n d i g e n o u s c 1 ass i f i cat or y syst em of t hs cu 11 ur e t hey ar e st udy i ng „ T h
