UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Community ideology and the ideology of community : the Orokaiva case Braun, Nickolai G. 1982

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1982_A8 B74.pdf [ 5.81MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0095033.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0095033-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0095033-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0095033-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0095033-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0095033-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0095033-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0095033-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0095033.ris

Full Text

COMMUNITY IDEOLOGY AND THE IDEOLOGY OF COMMUNITY THE OROKAIVA CASE by NICKOLAI G. BRAUN B.A., The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , 1979 A THESIS SUBMITTED I N . PARTIAL FULFILMENT ;OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS -i n • . THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES ( D e p a r t m e n t o f A n t h r o p o l o g y ) We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s as c o n f o r m i n g t o t h e r e q u i r e d s t a n d a r d ' THE UNIVE-RSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA September 1982 0 N i c k o l a l G. B r a u n , 1982 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I agr e e t h a t the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y . I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may be g r a n t e d by the Head o f my Department o r by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . Department o f Anthropology & Sociology The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date Qo£<r&est_ 9 / A B S T R A C T " C o m m u n i t y " i s a w o r d t h a t s u f f u s e s W e s t e r n d i s c o u r s e . I t s u s e i s w i d e s p r e a d i n b o t h p o p u l a r a n d i n t h e m o r e s p e c i a l -i z e d l a n g u a g e s o f a n t h r o p o l o g y a n d s o c i o l o g y . T h o u g h r i c h i n m e a n i n g , " c o m m u n i t y " i s y e t o f t e n e m p l o y e d t o a r b i t r a r i l y b i n d p e o p l e t o g e t h e r ' f r o m t h e o u t s i d e ' . T h u s 'a c o m m u n i t y ' , ' p e a s a n t c o m m u n i t i e s ' , a n d s o o n , r e f e r t o b o u n d e d e n t i t i e s t h a t a r e t h e r e . T h i s t h e s i s b e g i n s b y t a k i n g c o m m u n i t y a s a p r o b l e m . F o r t h o u g h we w r i t e e a s i l y . a b o u t , a n d e a s i l y a p p l y , t h e c o n c e p t o f 'a c o m m u n i t y ' , t h e n o t i o n o f b e i n g ' i n c o m m u n i t y ' , t a k i n g c o m m u n i t y t o r e f e r , t o a s h a r e d o r common q u a l i t y o r s t a t e o f b e i n g , i s n o t s o e a s i l y a p p l i e d , l e t a l o n e t h o u g h t . W hat ivS t h e r e f o r e e x p l o r e d i s a n o t i o n o f c o m m u n i t y a s a p r o c e s s , b o t h g e n e r a l l y a n d i n r e l a t i o n t o a p a r t i c u l a r P a p u a New G u i n e a n p e o p l e , t h e O r o k a i v a . A s a p r o c e s s , c o m m u n i t y i s t a k e n t o be ' e m e r g e n t ' , r a t h e r t h a n ' t h e r e ' . " C o m m u n i t y " i s s u b s e q u e n t l y d e v e l o p e d a s an a l t e r n a t i v e p a r a d i g m o f o r d e r t o t h e d e s c e n t - b a s e d m o d e l s o f W i l l i a m s , C r o c o m b e & H o g b i n , R i m o l d i a n d S c h w i m m e r . i i i . T he O r o k a i v a p l a n t e m b l e m , a c e n t r a l s y m b o l o f O r o k a i v a s o c i a l i t y , i s f o c u s e d o n . S t e m m i n g f r o m a n o t i o n o f ' e m e r g e n t c o m m u n i t y ' , t h e i n t e r r e l a t e d . p r o b l e m s o f i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , a f f i l i a -t i o n , i d e o l o g y , a n d c o n t e x t a r e s e l e c t e d a n d p u r s u e d i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e O r o k a i v a p l a n t e m b l e m . I f o l l o w M c K e l l i n ' s ( 1 9 8 0 ) d e l i n e a t i o n o f t h r e e o r d e r i n g p r i n c i p l e s -- l i n e a l i t y , t e r r i t o r i a l i t y , a n d e x c h a n g e / c o m m e n -s a l i t y -- f r o m M a n a g a l a s e k i n s h i p i d e o l o g y ; t h e s e same t h r e e p r i n c i p l e s a r e s h o w n t o u n d e r l i e some O r o k a i v a n o t i o n s o f p l a n t e m b l e m i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . T a k i n g t h e s e o r d e r i n g p r i n c i p l e s t o g e t h e r w i t h some O r o k a i v a n o t i o n s o f " s u b s t a n c e " , a c o m p l e x o f i n t e r r e l a t e d O r o k a i v a i d e a s i s d e l i n e a t e d . I t i s t h i s i d e a t i o n a l o r d e r w h i c h i s h y p o t h e s i z e d a s c o n s t i t u t i n g t h e i d e a t i o n a l r e s o u r c e s e n g a g e d i n t h e i n d i g e n o u s r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n o f O r o k a i v a s o c i a l i t y . Some c o n t e x t s g e n e r a t e d b y t h r e e e v e n t s -- b i r t h , m a r r i a g e , a n d d e a t h -- a r e a n a l y s e d i n t h e l i g h t o f t h a t c o m p l e x o f i d e a s t e r m e d a n ' i d e o l o g y o f c o m m u n i t y ' . R e f e r r e d t o a s ' c o n t e x t s f o r c o m m u n i t y ' , t h e y s u g g e s t some o f t h e p o s s i b l e w a y s i n -w h i c h t h e i d e a t i o n a l o r d e r i s u t i l i z e d t o c l o s e t h e a m b i g u i t i e s o f s o c i a l i t y a n d make t h e p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l d i m e n s i o n o f " c o m m u n i t y " v i s i b l e . R e l i a n t u p o n t h e e t h n o g r a p h i c w o r k o f o t h e r s , t h i s t h e s i s i s p r i m a r i l y f o r w a r d e d a s a p r o b l e m - s e e k i n g , r a t h e r t h a n a p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g s t u d y . W i l l " c o m m u n i t y " e v e r be f o u n d among t h e O r o k a i v a ? TABLE OF CONTENTS A b s t r a c t i i I n t r o d u c t i o n I . The P r o b l e m A d d r e s s e d . . . . 1 I I . Commun i t y D e f i n e d 4 I I I . Commun i t y I d e o l o g y and t h e I d e o l o g y o f C o m m u n i t y . . 7 I V . L e v i - S t r a u s s , D u r k h e i m , and Commun i t y 9 F o o t n o t e s t o I n t r o d u c t i o n 15 C h a p t e r One C o n c e p t u a l i z i n g Group F o r m a t i o n among t h e  O r o k a i v a I . I n t r o d u c t i o n 17 I I . C rocombe & H o g b i n ' s and R i m o l d i ' s P a r a d i g m s . . . 18 a) C rocombe & H o g b i n 19 b) R i m o l d i 21 I I I . W i l l i a m s ' P a r a d i g m 23 I V . S c h w i m m e r ' s P a r a d i g m . . . . . . . '. 28 V . P l a n t Emblem G r o u p i n g s 31 V I . The M e a n i n g o f Commun i t y 39 V I I . The O r o k a i v a P l a n t Emblem as a S y m b o l . o f Commun i t y 42 F o o t n o t e s t o C h a p t e r One 46 C h a p t e r Two The O r o k a i v a P l a n t Emb lem: Towa rd s an  I d e o l o g y o f Commun i t y I . I n t r o d u c t i o n 50 I I . S o c i a l F l u x 52 I I I . L i n e a l i t y , T e r r i t o r i a l i t y , and E x c h a n g e / C o m m e n s a l i t y I 58 a) L i n e a l i t y 59 b) T e r r i t o r i a l i t y 60 c ) E x c h a n g e / C o m m e n s a l i t y 62 I V . L i n e a l i t y , T e r r i t o r i a l i t y , and E x c h a n g e C o m m e n s a l i t y I I 65 a) Hamo and A h i h i 67 b) I v o 69 V . T owa rd s an I d e o l o g y o f Commun i t y 72 F o o t n o t e s t o C h a p t e r Two. 77 C h a p t e r T h r e e B i r t h , M a r r i a g e , D e a t h : C o n t e x t s f o r  Commun i t y I . I n t r o d u c t i o n 79 V T a b l e o f C o n t e n t s c o n t i n u e d I I . B i r t h and Community 82 a) C h i l d r e n and A n c e s t o r s 82 b) The T a t o R e l a t i o n s h i p 87 c) L i n e a l i t y , T e r r i t o r i a l i t y , and E x c h a n g e / C o m m e n s a l i t y 92 I I I . M a r r i a g e and Community 93 a) The P r o b l e m . w i t h ' R u l e s ' . . 93 b) The P r o b l e m o f M a r i t a l E l i g i b i l i t y . . . 96 c) O r o k a i v a M a r r i a g e and Hae I d e n t i f i c a t i o n . . 99 d) L i n e a l i t y , T e r r i t o r i a l i t y , and E x c h a n g e / C o m m e n s a l i t y 105 I V . D e a t h and Community 105 a) The Pusu-I.j uka and t h e N a t e r a r i F e a s t 108 b) Summary 113 F o o t n o t e s t o C h a p t e r T h r e e 116 C h a p t e r F o u r Summary and C o n c l u s i o n I . Summary 118 I I . C o n c l u s i o n . . . 125 Map s Map I . A8 Map I I 131 D i a g r a m s C h a p t e r Two, f i g u r e (a) 70 (b) 71 C h a p t e r T h r e e , f i g u r e (a) I l l B i b l i o g r a p h y I . Works C i t e d 132 I I . O t h e r O r o k a i v a R e f e r e n c e s 140 I INTRODUCTION I. The Problem Addressed Twenty years have passed since the publication of Barnes' (1962) succinct c r i t i q u e of the application of African-derived segmentary lineage models to Highland New Guinea s o c i e t i e s . In Barnes' wake have followed others, elaborating the i n i t i a l c r i t i c i s m s made and suggesting ways of overcoming the d i f f i c u l t i e s encountered (cf. Langness 1964, de Lepervanche 1967, Pouwer 1960, 1966a, 1966b, Salisbury 1964). With the p r i n c i p a l exception of research conducted in Irian Jaya however (cf. Pouwer 1960), debate over the descent-centered view of New Guinea social structure has been more or less confined to the Highlands. Reasons for the r e l a t i v e absence of this debate in r e l a t i o n to the more coastal and lowland societies may be found in the history of contact and the anthropological endeavor i t s e l f : E a r l i e r coastal and lowland research (cf. Williams 1924, 1936, 1940, Bateson 1958) preceded the impact of the ana l y t i c a l advances of Evans-Pritchard and Fortes regarding u n i l i n e a l systems, the l a t t e r in turn preceding and forming the basis for much of early Highland research (cf. Meggitt 1965, Reay 1959, Salisbury 1956). A l l this should not be taken to mean that descent-based models have not been applied--and these not without d i f f i c u l t y - --2-to l o w l a n d and c o a s t a l s o c i e t i e s . The a n a l y s e s of the O r o k a i v a , p r i n c i p a l l y by W i l l i a m s (1925, 1928, 1930) and Schwimmer (1969, 1970, 1973) a r e a c a s e i n p o i n t . Thus we f i n d W i l l i a m s s t a t i n g : "The O r o k a i v a o r g a n i z a t i o n v e r y n e a r l y a p p r o a c h e s a b i l a t e r a l s y s t e m , though i n t h e o r y i t i s p a t r i l i n e a l " ( W i l l i a m s 1925: 407; emphasis m i n e ) . Schwimmer, t o o , a d o p t s a q u a l i f i e d d e s c e n t - b a s e d v i e w p o i n t i n g i v i n g e q u a l w e i g h t to b o t h " t h e p r i n c i p l e of d e s c e n t " and " t h e p r i n c i p l e o f r e c i p r o c i t y " (Schwimmer 1973: 3 ) . Schwimmer i s n e v e r t h e l e s s c o n s t r a i n e d to r e c o n c i l e the ' i d e a l ' 1 , l o g i c a l o u t w o r k i n g of a p a t r i l i n e a l s y s t e m w i t h O r o k a i v a b e h a v i o r : "The O r o k a i v a a r e p a t r i l o c a l and have d i s p e r s e d p a t r i c l a n s . . . T h e b a s i c i n h e r i t a n c e r u l e i s p a t r i l i n e a l " ( i b i d . : 1 9 3 ) . But, i n r e g a r d s t o the t r a n s f e r of u s e h o l d r i g h t s to l a n d , . . . d e p a r t u r e s from p a t r i l i n e a l i d e o l o g y do not i n the l e a s t r e d u c e the u s e f u l n e s s of a d e s c e n t m odel... p r o v i d i n g t h a t we can p l a u s i b l y r e g a r d a l l d e p a r t u r e s from the p a t r i l i n e a l r u l e as random r e s p o n s e s to the v i c i s s i t u d e s of l i f e . ( i b i d . : 96) The f u n d a m e n t a l p r o b l e m h e r e , as w i t h Crocombe & H o g b i n ' s (1963) and R i m o l d i ' s (1966) a p p r o a c h to O r o k a i v a s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e , i s , i n L a n g n e s s ' words, " . . . t h e d i s c r e p e n c y between i d e o l o g y and s t a t i s t i c a l norms" ( L a n g n e s s op. c i t . : 158). Now L a n g n e s s s t a t e s t h a t a t t e m p t s to d e a l w i t h t h i s d i s -j u n c t i o n have been " h a n d i c a p p e d " by " p r e c o n c e p t i o n s " , such as a u n i l i n e a l b i a s ( i b i d . ) . More to the p o i n t , p e r h a p s , would be to ask why t h i s d i s j u n c t i o n between i d e o l o g y and p r a c t i c e i n i t s - 3 -p r e s e n t form s h o u l d e x i s t at a l l . R a t h e r than h a n d i c a p p i n g a t t e m p t s to d e a l w i t h i t , I would s u g g e s t t h a t a " u n i l i n e a l b i a s " o r , more g e n e r a l l y , a d e s c e n t - c e n t e r e d n e s s , i s the s o u r c e o f the d i s c r e p e n c i e s t h e m s e l v e s . I f W i l l i a m s , Schwimmer, Crocombe & H o g b i n , and R i m o l d i c o l l e c t i v e l y f a i l t o move beyond a d i s j u n c t i o n between d e s c e n t - b a s e d models of s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e , and the a c t u a l c o m p o s i t i o n of c o r p o r a t e g r o u p s , i t i s p r e c i s e l y b e c a u s e of a " u n i l i n e a l b i a s " : The " i d e o l o g y " d e l i n e a t e d from n a t i v e s t a t e m e n t s i s p e r c e i v e d as one of p a t r i l i n e a l i t y , to the a p p a r e n t e x c l u s i o n of a l t e r n a t i v e m eanings. Now, a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l a n a l y s e s o f New G u i n e a s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e can be seen to f a l l a l o n g a l i n e , the e n d p o i n t s o f w h i c h we can c o n v e n i e n t l y d i s t i n g u i s h i n the f o l l o w i n g manner. The m e t h o d o l o g i e s employed f a l l somewhere between (a) f i t t i n g an a n a l y t i c system of l o g i c a l l y d e t e r m i n e d a f f i l i a t i v e c a t e g o r i e s to the d i s c e r n e d s o c i a l m i l i e u , and (b) a l l o w i n g t h e a n a l y t i c model to r e f l e c t as c l o s e l y as p o s s i b l e the c u l t u r a l c a t e g o r i e s , i d e a s , e x e g e s e s , e t c . In a d o p t i n g the above c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n of a n t h r o p o l o g y i n Papua New G u i n e a , the a f o r e m e n t i o n e d a n a l y s e s o f O r o k a i v a s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e would be p l a c e d c l o s e r to ' p o i n t ' (a) than to ' p o i n t ' ( b ) . The t a s k s e t f o r t h i s t h e s i s , however, i s to i n i t i a t e the d e v e l o p m e n t of an a l t e r n a t i v e p a r a d i g m of o r d e r ' i n the o p p o s i t e d i r e c t i o n ' , i.e.,, to r e a p p r a i s e the e t h n o g r a p h i c c o r p u s w i t h a v i e w to r e c o n c e p t u a l i z i n g O r o k a i v a s o c i a l i t y , g i v i n g g r e a t e r s i g n i f i c a n c e -4-to O r o k a i v a meanings, symbols and c a t e g o r i e s . J S i n c e the d a t a c o l l e c t e d i n p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s of the O r o k a i v a was o b t a i n e d p r i m a r i l y to d e a l w i t h d i f f e r e n t k i n d s o f p r o b l e m s , the p r e s e n t s t u d y i s an e x p l o r a t o r y one. The o v e r a r c h i n g p u r p o s e of t h i s t h e s i s i s t h e r e f o r e the p r e p a r a t i o n of a new framework of p r o b l e m s t h a t can g u i d e f u t u r e f i e l d r e s e a r c h among the O r o k a i v a . Towards t h i s end I f o c u s on the O r o k a i v a p l a n t emblem. A l t h o u g h e m e r g i n g from the e t h n o g r a p h i c c o r p u s as the c e n t r a l symbol o f O r o k a i v a s o c i a l i t y ' ' " , the O r o k a i v a p l a n t emblem has 2 r e c e i v e d o n l y c u r s o r y and u n s y s t e m a t i c a t t e n t i o n . The d a t a a v a i l a b l e on the O r o k a i v a p l a n t emblem, however, p r o v i d e s a s u f -f i c i e n t b a s i s f o r a s y s t e m a t i c r e - e x a m i n a t i o n of O r o k a i v a s o c i a l i t y g e n e r a l l y . In c o n s t r u c t i n g a p a r a d i g m of o r d e r based upon the O r o k a i v a s y s t e m of p l a n t emblem c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , a f u r t h e r p r o b l e m i s i n t r o d u c e d : The c o n c e p t of "community". I I . "Community" D e f i n e d The c o n c e p t o f 'Community"is p r o b l e m a t i c s i m p l y by v i r t u e of i t s c o m m o n a l i t y of usage and the a t t e n d a n t m u l t i p l i c i t y of d e f i n i -t i o n s s u r r o u n d i n g i t . H i l l a r y , f o r example, found n i n e t y - f o u r d e f i n i t i o n s o f "community" i n the s o c i o l o g i c a l l i t e r a t u r e to the mid-1950's ( H i l l a r y 1955). B r e a k i n g t h i s s e t of d e f i n i t i o n s down 3 a c c o r d i n g t o s i x t e e n d i f f e r e n t c o n c e p t s , H i l l a r y c o n c l u d e d t h a t , "...beyond the c o n c e p t t h a t p e o p l e a r e i n v o l v e d i n community, -5-there i s no complete agreement as to the nature of community" ( i b i d . : 119). There i s , however,another d i f f i c u l t y unobserved by H i l l a r y . Implicit in H i l l a r y ' s analysis, as well as in the def i n i t i o n s reviewed, i s the assumption that "community" i s something that is "there". Thus the use of the concept with an a r t i c l e (a^  community, the community) i s seldom empirically d i f f e r -entiated for an a l y t i c a l purposes from the use of the concept with a p a r t i c l e (in community, of_ community). If the concept, "community" is to be of any use, this d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n must f i r s t of a l l be made e x p l i c i t . Gusfield's " c r i t i c a l response" to the use of "community" r e f l e c t s exactly the opposite bias. Gusfield divides the use of the concept into two broad camps, " t e r r i t o r i a l " and " r e l a t i o n a l " (Gusfield 1975: xv-xvi). A t e r r i t o r i a l usage of "community" generally refers to s o c i a l interactions within a given physical location, carries the implication of continuity, and invites enquiry concerning change. Such is i t s meaning in "Community Studies", "Community Power Structures", "The Urban Community", and so on. A r e l a t i o n a l use of "community" generally has to do with the quality or character of human relationships "...without reference to location" ( i b i d . : x v i ) . The point of contention for Gusfield i s t h i s : Whether used to designate a t e r r i t o r i a l l y - b a s e d aggregate of s o c i a l actors, or the quality or character of human relationships, the u t i l i t y of -6-the c o n c e p t i s s e v e r e l y hampered by i t s p e r s i s t e n t r e i f i c a t i o n ; t h a t i s , t r e a t i n g "community" as an e m p i r i c a l , r a t h e r t h a n an a n a l y t i c a l term ( i b i d . : 12-13). G u s f i e l d moves on to o u t l i n e an a p p r o a c h to t h e c o n c e p t t h a t v iews "community" as c r e a t e d , not g i v e n ; i t i s a s y m b o l i c c o n s t r u c t i o n ( i b i d . : 24-25). The pr o b l e m of c o n t e x t i s c o r r e s -p o n d i n g l y r a i s e d : "When do p e o p l e d e f i n e t h e m s e l v e s as h a v i n g i m p o r t a n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i n common, and when do t h e s e become b a s e s f o r communal i d e n t i t y and a c t i o n ? " ( i b i d . : 3 0 ) . "Community" f o r G u s f i e l d , t h e n , i s a " c o n s c i o u s n e s s of k i n d " ( i b i d . : 32) w h i c h i s c o n t e x t u a l l y c r e a t e d t h r o u g h s y m b o l i c i d e n t i f i c a t i o n ; r e j e c t e d i s a n o t i o n of community as an e m p i r i c a l group or e n t i t y to w h i c h 4 p e r s o n s " b e l o n g " ( i b i d . : 4 1 ) . In the c o n s t r u c t i o n of my own 'paradigm of o r d e r ' f o r the O r o k a i v a , I c o n c u r w i t h G u s f i e l d c o n c e r n i n g the use of "community" as an a n a l y t i c , but I d i f f e r w i t h G u s f i e l d c o n c e r n i n g the phenome-non i t a n a l y s e s . C e r t a i n l y c r e a t e d t h r o u g h the use o f s y m b o l s , "community" n e v e r t h e l e s s i n v o l v e s p e o p l e i n v o l v e d w i t h one a n o t h e r . Groups, or phenomenal o r d e r i n g s , do come i n t o b e i n g . To emphasize the " r e l a t i o n a l " usage of "community" at the c o s t of d e n y i n g the c o n c e p t ' s s i g n i f i c a t i o n of a c t u a l s o c i a l g r o u p i n g s , amounts to a d e n i a l of e x p e r i e n c e . In a way, G u s f i e l d ' s own a n a l y s i s can i t s e l f be seen as a symbol o f t h e t e n s i o n c o n n o t e d by "community". F o r t h e r e i s , I a r g u e , a t e n s i o n embedded i n the d i s t i n c t i o n between the - 7 -phenomenal experience of 'a community' and the notion of being 'in community'. This tension i t s e l f "...connotes the d i a l e c t i c in action..." (Burridge 1969: xi x ) , the process entailed in the emergence of actual phenomenal orderings through a corporate identity with a common symbol or symbols. The concept of "community" employed in this thesis therefore implies neither "a community" nor being " i n community", but both as part of an overall process of s o c i a l i t y . In Chapter One I reiterate the concept of "community" outlined above, but I develop i t using the etymological data provided in the Oxford English Dictionary. I l l . Community Ideology and the Ideology of Community Often a metaphorical image "...of v i r t u o u s or vicious human a s s o c i a t i o n s — d e p i c t i o n s of i d e a l s and e v i l s t o be s o u g h t o r to be avoided..." (Gusfield op. c i t . : 2), the notion of "community" i s at such t i m e s incorporated into various ideologies and U t o p i a n doctrines, a mythic image of some sought after or avoided s o c i a l order. No such usage is intended here. . By the use of "community" I do wish to indicate a moral order, a shared moral awareness, an 'in v i t a t i o n to act in certain ways'. The phrase "moral community" i s therefore, in the context of this thesis, a redundancy. To be in a community is to accept obligation -8-B u r r i d g e s t a t e s : " O n l y t h o s e who l i v e i n a m o r a l o r d e r need t o have r e a s o n s f o r a c t i n g . . . " ( B u r r i d g e 1969: 1 6 3 ) . The i m p l i c a t i o n o f t h i s s t a t e m e n t i s t h a t t o t a l k o f " c o m m u n i t y " i s to t a l k o f t h e r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n s p e o p l e g i v e f o r c o r p o r a t e l y i d e n t i f y i n g one w i t h a n o t h e r . H ence, an " i d e o l o g y o f c o m m u n i t y " . C o n c e r n i n g t h e i d e a t i o n a l o r d e r o f c o mmunity, Goodenough has t h i s t o s a y : The phenomenal o r d e r i s a p r o p e r t y o f t h e community as a m a t e r i a l s y s t e m o f p e o p l e , t h e i r s u r r o u n d i n g s , and t h e i r b e h a v i o r . The i d e a t i o n a l o r d e r i s a p r o p e r t y n o t o f t h e community b u t o f i t s members. (Goodenough 1964: 11) The i d e o l o g y o f community i s t h u s i n d i v i d u a l i z e d , i n t h e m i n d , non-ma t e r i a l . By c o n t r a s t , t h e p h r a s e "community i d e o l o g y " I t a k e t o r e f e r e n c e t h e i d e o l o g y o f community e x p l i c i t l y s h a r e d , a c k n o w l e d g e d t h r o u g h p u b l i c i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h a common s y m b o l o r s y m b o l s . I n o t h e r w o r d s , a c o n s e n s u s o f m e a n i n g i s a t t a i n e d i n t h e f o r m -a t i o n o f a phenomenal o r d e r i n g . The c o m p o s i t e p h r a s e "community i d e o l o g y and t h e i d e o l o g y o f c o m m u n i t y " t h e r e f o r e c o m m u n i c a t e s a ' t o and f r o m ' movement o f t h e l o c u s o f a s e n s e of community, between t h e i n d i v i d u a l and t h e c o l l e c t i v e . I n Goodenough's w o r d s , community as a phenomenal o r d e r " . . . i s an a r t i f a c t o f t h e i d e a t i o n a l o r d e r o f i t s members..." w h e r e a s " . . . t h e i d e a t i o n a l o r d e r i s i t s e l f a f f e c t e d by t h e phen-omenal o r d e r " ( i b i d . : 1 2 ) . -9-"Community" as an overall process thus Involves these four interrelated facets of s o c i a l i t y : 'community as a phenomenal ordering', 'a sense of community', 'a community ideology', 'an ideology of community'. To suggest that this process i s one of continuous creation and re-creation is to therefore suggest that these four facets of s o c i a l i t y are continually constructed In rel a t i o n to one another. IV. Levi-Strauss, Durkheim, and Community Without reference to s p e c i f i c s , the Orokaiva system of plant emblem c l a s s i f i c a t i o n might arguably be presented as a particular mode of a more general form of c l a s s i f i c a t i o n involving a r e l a t i o n -ship between two systems—natural and c u l t u r a l - - of homologous differences (cf. Levi-Strauss 1963, 1976). In other words, Orokaiva plant emblems might be conceptualized as a Levi-Straussian totemic system, and analyzed as such. That I do not perform this sort of structural analysis requires comment. This thesis conceptualizes the Orokaiva plant emblem as a symbol of community and, delineating a series of interrelated b e l i e f s associated with plant emblems, considers how those b e l i e f s might further an understanding of. the dynamics of Orokaiva s o c i a l i t y . L e v i - S t r a u s s ' a n a l y t i c a l approach to totemic c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , how-ever, d i f f e r e n t i a t e s systems of be l i e f from systems of action: - 1 0 -Customs l e a d t o b e l i e f s , and t h e s e l e a d t o t e c h n i q u e s , b u t t h e d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s do n o t s i m p l y r e f l e c t e a c h o t h e r . They r e a c t d i a l e c t i c a l l y among t h e m s e l v e s i n s u c h a way t h a t we c a n n o t hope t o u n d e r -s t a n d one o f them w i t h o u t f i r s t e v a l u a t i n g , t h r o u g h t h e i r , r e s p e c t i v e r e l a t i o n s o f o p p o s i t i o n and c o r r e l a t i o n , i n s t i t u t i o n s , r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s , and s i t u a t i o n s . ( L e v i - S t r a u s s 1963: 91) Such an a n a l y s i s o f O r o k a i v a p l a n t emblems w o u l d c o n s e q u e n t l y e x c l u d e f r o m c o n s i d e r a t i o n t h a t a s s o c i a t e d c o m p l e x o f i d e a s t e r m e d an " i d e o l o g y of c ommunity". I f o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f O r o k a i v a s o c i a l i t y i s t o be f u r t h e r e d a t a l l a p u r e l y s t r u c t u r a l a n a l y s i s o f t h i s s o r t must be r e j e c t e d ; f a i l u r e t o do so w o u l d b e , i n R o h a t y n s k y j ' s w o r d s , a d e n i a l o f " . . . t h e h o l i s t i c n a t u r e o f t h e s o c i a l p r o c e s s " ( R o h a t y n s k y j 1978: 5 4 ) . On t h e o t h e r h a n d , c o n c e p t u a l i z i n g t h e O r o k a i v a p l a n t emblem as a s y m b o l o f community s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e p a r a d i g m h e r e e m p l o y e d has i t s r o o t s i n D u r k h e i m . The s i m i l a r i t y t o D u r k h e i m ' s t h o u g h t stems f r o m h i s t h e o r y t h a t t h e b e l i e f s and p r a c t i c e s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e t o t e m i c o b j e c t r e f l e c t e d n o t a w o r s h i p o f t h e o b j e c t , b u t o f s o c i e t y . F o r D u r k h e i m , s o c i e t y i s t h e o b j e c t of a l l w o r s h i p . The t o t e m i c emblem, t h e n , s y m b o l i z e s n o t so much t h e t o t e m i t s e l f as s o c i e t y ( D u r k h e i m 1965: 2 3 5 - 3 6 ) . The p a r a d i g m o f " c o m m u n i t y " employed i n t h i s t h e s i s , h o w e v e r , d i f f e r s f u n d a m e n t a l l y w i t h D u r k h e i m ' s t h e o r y on a number o f b a s i c p o i n t s . F i r s t o f a l l , c o n t r a D u r k h e i m ( o p . c i t . : 1 4 0 ) , " c o m m u n i t y " i s n o t p o s i t e d as an o b j e c t o f w o r s h i p , n o r i s i t r e i f i e d l i k e -11-Dur.kheim's " s o c i e t y " (see f o o t n o t e 4 ) . S i m i l a r l y , no " s a c r edne s s" i s h e r e a t t a c h e d to community symbols: The O r o k a i v a do not t r e a t t h e i r p l a n t emblems w i t h any p a r t i c u l a r r e v e r e n c e ( W i l l i a m s 1930: 127). F o r Durkheim, the c o r p o r a t e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h a t o t e m i c emblem communicated a u n i t y o f t h o u g h t and f e e l i n g s (Durkheim op. c i t . : 3 3 3 ) . But, h a v i n g d e f i n e d community as c o n n o t i n g a s e n s e of community i n t e n s i o n w i t h t h a t sense a c t u a l i z e d i n some s o r t o f phenomenal o r d e r i n g , symbols of community a r e h e r e imbued w i t h the a b i l i t y to communicate not o n l y u n i t y , but a l s o u n i t y ' s a n t i t h e s i s ; autonomy, o r s e l f - w i l l e d n e s s . Among the O r o k a i v a , t h i s a n t i t h e s i s i s r e f l e c t e d most c l e a r l y i n t h e i r p r o p e n s i t y to ' i n v e n t ' p e r s o n a l p l a n t emblems, w h i c h may t h e r e a f t e r become c o r p o r a t e emblems ( W i l l i a m s 1925:421; 1930:124-5). Durkheim, f a c e d w i t h i n d i v i d u a l totems among the A r u n t a , as w e l l as i n o t h e r e t h n o g r a p h i c s o u r c e s ( c f . Durkheim op. c i t : 1 8 4 ) , f o l l o w e d F r a z e r i n d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g " i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m i s m " from " c o l l e c t i v e t o t e m i s m " ( i b i d . : 187) and then went on to argue t h a t " b o t h v a r i e t i e s " were i n t e r l o c k e d ( i b i d . : 188) t h r o u g h the i d e a of the s o u l : The totem a s . t h e a n c e s t o r , i s t h e s o u l of the i n d i v i d u a l , b u t e x t e r n a l i z e d and i n v e s t e d w i t h powers s u p e r i o r to t h o s e i t i s b e l i e v e d to p o s s e s s w h i l e w i t h i n the o r g a n i s m . Now t h i s d u p l i c a t i o n i s the r e s u l t of a p s y c h o r l o g i c a l n e c e s s i t y ; f o r i t . o n l y e x p r e s s e s the n a t u r e of the s o u l w h i c h i s d o u b l e . In - 1 2 -o n e s e n s e i t i s o u r s : i t e x p r e s s e s our-p e r s o n a l i t y . B u t a t t h e same t i m e i t i s o u t s i d e o f u s , f o r i t i s o n l y t h e r e a c h i n g i n t o u s o f a r e l i g i o u s f o r c e w h i c h i s o u t -s i d e o f u s . ( i b i d . : 3 1 6 - 1 7 ) A n d t h a t " r e l i g i o u s f o r c e " e m a n a t e s f o r D u r k h e i m f r o m s o c i e t y . N e v e r t h e l e s s , D u r k h e i m l e a v e s " i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m i s m " a n d " c o l l e c t i v e t o t e m i s m " a s d i s t i n c t s y s t e m s . T h i s t h e s i s , h o w e v e r , t r e a t s b o t h t h e p a r t i c u l a r i z i n g a n d t h e c o l l e c t i v i z i n g a s p e c t s o f t h e O r o k a i v a p l a n t e m b l e m a s o n e s i n g l e p r o c e s s . F i n a l l y , D u r k h e i m p o s i t e d t h e t o t e m a s a s y m b o l o f s o c i e t y ' s m o r a l a u t h o r i t y o v e r t h e i n d i v i d u a l . A s a s y m b o l o f c o m m u n i t y t h e O r o k a i v a p l a n t e m b l e m i s a l t e r n a t i v e l y v i e w e d i n C h a p t e r One a s c o n t a i n i n g b o t h m o r a l a n d t a c t i c a l i m p l i c a t i o n s , t h e f o r m e r r e f e r r i n g t o n o r m a t i v e , r e c i p r o c a l o b l i g a t i o n , t h e l a t t e r r e f e r r i n g t o t h e a c t u a l p o l i t i c a l u s e o f p l a n t e m b l e m s i n t h e c o u r s e o f d a i l y l i f e . A n d t h e t a c t i c a l u s e o f t h e p l a n t e m b l e m may o p p o s e i t s m o r a l i m p l i c a t i o n s , t h o u g h i t n e e d n o t . T h i s l a s t p o i n t i s t h e c e n t r a l a m b i g u i t y o f p l a n t e m b l e m i d e n t i f i c a t i o n c o n t a i n e d i n t h e p a r a d i g m o f c o m m u n i t y e m p l o y e d . I n C h a p t e r Two I e x a m i n e t h e i d e a t i o n a l o r d e r a s s o c i a t e d w i t h p l a n t e m b l e m i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . T a k i n g d i r e c t i o n f r o m M c K e l l i n ' s ( 1 9 8 0 ) a n a l y s i s o f M a n a g a l a s e k i n s h i p i d e o l o g y , I d i s t i l l f r o m t h e O r o k a i v a e t h n o g r a p h y a n i d e n t i c a l s e t o f o r d e r i n g p r i n c i p l e s — l i n e a l i t y , t e r r i t o r i a l i t y , a n d e x c h a n g e / c o m m e n s a l i t y — t o g e t h e r w i t h c e r t a i n e m i c c o n c e p t i o n s o f s h a r e d " s u b s t a n c e " . I t e r m t h e r e s u l t a n t c o m p l e x o f i n t e r l o c k i n g i d e a s a n " i d e o l o g y o f c o m m u n i t y " -It i s t h i s " i d e o l o g y o f ; c o m m u n i t y " w h i c h a r t i --1.3-culates the bases for plant emblem i d e n t i f i c a t i o n ; i t is this ideational order which, too, i s forwarded as constituting (at . least in part) the c u l t u r a l forms by which the Orokaiva create their s o c i a l groupings. Put another way, the native r a t i o n a l i z a -tions brought forward constitute at least some of the s i g n i f i c a n t "...strategic resources [ u t i l i z e d ] in the process of so c i a l organization" (Scheffler 1965: 294). In Chapter Three I consider three events which generate contexts for community: b i r t h , marriage, and death. I show how the ideational order presented in Chapter Two demarcates the boundaries of optative plant emblem i d e n t i f i c a t i o n in regards to each event. The 'configurations' (cf. Pouwer 1966a, 1966b, 1974) of l i n e a l , t e r r i t o r i a l , and exchange/commensal ties of r e l a t i o n -ships that are indicated for each event a r t i c u l a t e the contexts for community: The dynamics of the process of plant emblem group formation are made " v i s i b l e " through a delineation of the points at which a f f i l i a t i v e ambiguities and constraints may emerge for the Orokaiva themselves. -14-It is in the l i g h t of a perspective which views "community" as continually emergent, that the ethnographic problems of Orokaiva i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , a f f i l i a t i o n , ideology and context are selected and framed. And i t i s the notion of emergent community developed, which constitutes a problem for future f i e l d research among the Orokaiva. -15-F o o t n o t e s to I n t r o d u c t i o n ^" The i m p o r t a n c e of such i d e n t i t y emblems i n the c r e a t i o n of s o c i a l i t y has been r e c e n t l y d e s c r i b e d f o r the K o i a r i -s p e a k i n g B a r a i ( B a r k e r 1979) and Omie ( R o h a t y n s k y j 1978), b o t h p e o p l e s n e i g h b o u r i n g and h a v i n g c o n t a c t w i t h the O r o k a i v a a l o n g t h e r i d g e s s o u t h - e a s t of Mt. L a m i n g t o n . M c K e l l i n ' s (1980) r e s e a r c h among the M a n a g a l a s i — n e i g h b o u r i n g due s o u t h , on the s o u t h e r n s l o p e s of Mt. L a m i n g t o n — a l s o p r o v i d e s v a l u a b l e c l u e s to the n a t u r e of the O r o k a i v a p l a n t emblem sys t e m . 2 But see Schwimmer 1981. F o r a summary of t h i s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n see H i l l a r y (1955: 114-15) . ' Compare w i t h Durkheim's n o t i o n of " S o c i e t y " : " U n d o u b t e d l y a s o c i e t y i s a b e i n g , a p e r s o n . But t h i s b e i n g has n o t h i n g m e t a p h y s i c a l to i t . I t i s not a s u b s t a n c e more or l e s s t r a n s c e n d e n t ; i t i s a whole composed o f p a r t s " . (Review of Ludwig Gumplowicz, " G r u n d r i s s e der S o c i o l o g i e " i n Revue  P h i l o s o p h i q u e , 20 ( 1 8 8 5 ) : 632, t r a n s l a t e d and r e p r i n t e d i n Durkheim 1973: xx) " I t i s not s u g g e s t e d t h a t t h e O r o k a i v a t h e m s e l v e s c o n c e i v e the i d e a s b r o u g h t t o g e t h e r as a u n i t a r y s y s t e m o f e x p l a n a t i o n ; nor do I w i s h to i m p l y t h a t the O r o k a i v a " . . . s e g r e g a t e t h e s e i d e a s as a s e p a r a t e s u b s y s t e m w i t h i n t h e i r c u l t u r e " ( S c h e f f l e r 1965: 3 9 ) . As f o r the i d e a s t h e m s e l v e s , I have had to r e l y on what was c o n t a i n e d i n the e t h n o g r a p h y , r e s e r v i n g f u r t h e r e l a b o r a t i o n u n t i l f u t u r e f i e l d r e s e a r c h . Chapter One  Conceptualizing Group Formation among the Orokaiva -17-Chapter One I. Introduction While exploring the Mambara River in 1893, Sir William MacGregor and his party were greeted with shouts of "orokaiva! orokaiva!" from those who wished to be friendly (Williams 1930: 3)."*" Soon thereafter, the word "orokaiva" came to stand for most of the people of the Northern D i s t r i c t (now Oro Province). Winifred N. Beaver, while defending the use of the "orokaiva" 2 label on the basis of l i n g u i s t i c a f f i n i t i e s , acknowledged a lack of congruence between the colonial adminstration's and the native Papuans' view of socio-cultural d i v i s i o n : Most people, i f , indeed, a thought is given to the matter at a l l , are inclined to class each t r i b e , perhaps each v i l l a g e , as something t o t a l l y apart or d i s t i n c t . . . But, as a matter of fact, nearly ninety per cent of the tribes of the (Kumusi) Division can, I think, be correctly classed as a single race. These tribes extend from the Yodda Valley to the sea, and northward to the Papuan Boundary, and in referring to them i t i s convenient to adopt the term (admittedly incorrect) "Orokaiva", but i t is a general and popular one.... A l l these tribes speak dialects more or less closely a f f i l i a t e d to the Binandele language, and have been placed in the same language group. (Beaver 1916: 48) The co l o n i a l imposition of "order" onto what was (and is) indigenously perceived of as something quite different fore--18-shadowed s u b s e q u e n t a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l work among t h e O r o k a i v a . R e s e a r c h by W i l l i a m s ( 1 9 2 5 , 1 9 3 0 ) , Crocombe & H o g b i n ( 1 9 6 3 ) , R i m o l d i ( 1 9 6 6 ) , and Schwimmer ( 1 9 7 0 , 1973) has y i e l d e d f o u r ' p a r a d i g m s o f o r d e r ' . What w i l l be a r g u e d i n t h i s c h a p t e r i s t h e i n a b i l i t y o f t h e s e m o d e l s t o p o r t r a y O r o k a i v a s o c i a l i t y as a c c u r a t e l y as i t m i g h t be. More s p e c i f i c a l l y , i t w i l l be shown t h a t e a c h m o del s e e k s t o o r d e r " g r o u p s " t h a t a r e t a k e n t o be " t h e r e " (Wagner 1974) i n a manner t h a t , t o v a r y i n g d e g r e e s , v e i l s t h e p r o c e s s u a l n a t u r e o f O r o k a i v a s o c i a l i t y . B o t h R i m o l d i ' s and Crocombe & H o g b i n ' s p a r a d i g m s a r e de-l i n e a t e d f r o m t h e i r r a t h e r s p e c i f i c and summary s t u d i e s o f O r o k a v i a l a n d t e n u r e ; I d e a l w i t h t h e s e two p a r a d i g m s f i r s t . I t h e n t u r n t o what I b e l i e v e a r e t h e two more i m p o r t a n t p a r a d i g m s , W i l l i a m s ' and Schwimmer's r e s p e c t i v e l y . I I . Crocombe & H o g b i n ' s , and R i m o l d i ' s P a r a d i g m s B u r r i d g e has made t h e p o i n t t h a t , h a v i n g d e f i n e d man as an o r d e r l y c r e a t u r e , a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s " . . . f i n d a c e r t a i n o r d e r l i n e s s — b u t we c a n n o t do t h i s w i t h o u t a s c r i b i n g p u r p o s e " ( B u r r i d g e , 1973: 121; e m p h a s i s m i n e ) . Thus Crocombe & H o g b i n (1963) and R i m o l d i ( 1966) o b s e r v e an o r d e r l i n e s s among t h e O r o k a i v a , i t s p u r p o s e b e i n g . u n d e r s t o o d t o be t h e o r d e r i n g and t r a n s m i s s i o n o f r i g h t s r e l a t e d t o l a n d . I do n o t c o n t e n d w i t h t h e s e a u t h o r s ' o b s e r v a t i o n - 1 9 -o f o r d e r l i n e s s , f o r t h a t i s c e r t a i n l y p r e s e n t . Nor need t h e p u r p o s e f o r t h i s o r d e r l i n e s s be q u e s t i o n e d . R i g h t s t o l a n d do e x i s t , and c l a i m s t o l a n d must be made on t h e b a s i s o f some c r i t e r i a . C l a i m s t o l a n d a r e r e c o g n i z e d . And once r e c o g n i t i o n i s g i v e n t o a c l a i m a n t ' s p e t i t i o n t h a t c l a i m s h o u l d e n j o y t h e s u p p o r t o f c o r p o r a t e s a n c t i o n . What I do w i s h t o c o n t e n d w i t h i s the. way i n w h i c h Crocombe & H o g b i n and R i m o l d i p o r t r a y O r o k a i v a o r d e r l i n e s s . B o t h s t u d i e s m o d e l O r o k a i v a s o c i a l i t y i n t e r m s o f d i s c r e t e , s e g m e n t a l u n i t s , t h e r e a l i t y o f w h i c h i s d e n i e d by t h e i r own d a t a . a) Crocombe and H o g b i n Crocombe & H o g b i n i d e n t i f y a n e s t e d s e t o f f o u r u n i t s ? c l a n s , c o m p r i s e d o f s u b c l a n s , c o m p r i s e d o f l i n e a g e s , w h i c h , f i n a l l y , can be f u r t h e r b r o k e n down i n t o s u b - l i n e a g e s (Crocombe & H o g b i n op. c i t . : 1 6 - 1 7 ) . The t e r m " c l a n " r e f e r s t o : . . . t h e l a r g e p a t r i l i n e a l O r o k a i v a d e s c e n t g r o u p s , e a c h o f w h i c h c l a i m s d e s c e n t f r o m a common a n c e s t o r b u t c a n n o t t r a c e i t i n f a c t . E a c h c l a n has a common name and a common p l a n t emblem..., ( i b i d . : 16) Crocombe & H o g b i n u se t h e t e r m " s u b - c l a n " t o r e f e r t o " . . . a l o c a l b r a n c h o f a c l a n ( i . e . w i t h i n a p a r t i c u l a r v i l l a g e o r a c l u s t e r o f n e i g h b o u r i n g h a m l e t s ) " ( i b i d . : 1 7 ) . As f o r t h e -20-last two d i v i s i o n s : / A sub-clan is usually divided into a number of lineages each of which has a d i s t i n c t i v e name and an erahu (plant emblem) which is d i s t i n c t from that of the clan as a whole...some lineages are further divided into sub-1ineages. (ibid.) A closer examination of the ' c r i t e r i o n for membership' suggests i t s e l f . Crocombe & Hogbin c l a s s i f y individuals into these groupings according to the names that the Orokaiva share in re-la t i o n to others: "In conversation the Orokaiva often refer to the j awo (name) and speak of the members of one clan as embo j awo 3 vahai (people of the same name)" ( i b i d . ) . The Orokaiva refer to the sub-clan by the same term: they "...distinguish sub-clans when necessary by adding the name of the v i l l a g e in which they are located" ( i b i d . ) . Crocombe & Hogbin identi f y p a t r i l i n e a l descent as the sole basis for sharing a group name and a plant emblem. However, exceptions to the 'rule' of p a t r i l i n e a l i t y in regards to in h e r i -tance are numerous ( i b i d . : 14-16; 21-23), such that, in the v i l l a g e of Inonda, "...inheritance was not so direct in fact" ( i b i d . : 41). Nevertheless, cases where membership to a p a r t i -cular group cannot be accounted for on the basis of p a t r i l i n e a l descent are referred to as "deviant relationships" ( i b i d . ) . -21-b) R i m o l d l R i m o l d i ' s a n a l y s i s of O r o k a i v a s o c i a l i t y i n v o l v e s two p r i n c i p a l g r o u p i n g s (pace Crocombe & H o g b i n ' s p a r a d i g m of f o u r ' g r o u p i n g s ' ) : " c l a n " and " l i n e a g e " . C o n c e r n i n g the " c l a n " , R i m o l d i w r i t e s : E v e r y O r o k a i v a p e r s o n i s r e c r u i t e d by b i r t h to the c l a n of h i s f a t h e r . A l l members of t h i s d e s c e n t u n i t c l a i m but cannot t r a c e common d e s c e n t from a u s u a l l y eponymous a n c e s t o r ; t h e y do not  always s h a r e the same p l a n t emblem ( e r a h u ) commonly h e l d by p a t r i l i n e a l g r o u p s . ( R i m o l d i op. c i t . : 32; emphasis mine) U n l i k e Crocombe & Hogbin (op. c i t . : 1 6 ) , R i m o l d i a r g u e s t h a t the c l a n may not s h a r e a s i n g l e p l a n t emblem, an o b s e r v a t i o n W i l l i a m s a l s o made ( W i l l i a m s 1925: 4 2 0 ) . R i m o l d i f u r t h e r d e s i g n a t e s what Crocombe & Hogbin c a l l e d a " s u b - c l a n " (Crocombe & H o g b i n op. c i t . : 1 7 ) , and what W i l l i a m s c a l l e d a " c l a n - b r a n c h " ( W i l l i a m s 1930: 114), a " l i n e a g e " ; Each l i n e a g e i n our sample a t S i v e p e r e t a i n s a name s a i d to have been t r a n s -m i t t e d from some remote p a t r i l i n e a l a n c e s t o r and each s h a r e s a d i s t i n c t i v e p l a n t emblem a s s o c i a t e d w i t h i t s i d e n t i t y as an a g n a t i c g r o u p . ( R i m o l d i op. c i t . : 50) Though p r e s e n t e d as a s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d o r d e r i n g i n t o " c l a n s " and " l i n e a g e s " a c c o r d i n g to a r u l e of p a t r i l i n e a l d e s c e n t , R i m o l d i ' s own d a t a s u g g e s t s O r o k a i v a s o c i a l i t y c a n n o t be ,so e a s i l y a c c o u n t e d f o r . - 2 2 -The members o f t h e J e g e s e c l a n o f S i v e p e a r e d i v i d e d , a c c o r d i n g t o . R i m o l d i ' s p a r a d i g m , i n t o f o u r named l i n e a g e s . These l i n e a g e s a r e Be p e h u p a , Sesewopa, B e r e k i p a , and A r e h u . ( i b i d . : 3 7 ) . When a s k e d how t h e Sesewopa l i n e a g e o b t a i n e d i t s name ( f o r Sesewo i s t h e e r a h u o f t h e Bepehupa l i n e a g e ) , R i m o l d i ' s i n f o r m a n t ( s ) " s u g g e s t e d " t h a t t h e g r o u p ...was d e s c e n d e d f r o m a Bepehupa woman and t h a t t h e new l i n e a g e r e f e r r e d t o i t s a n c e s -t r e s s by t h e name o f t h e e r a h u o f h e r g r o u p , i . e . as Sesewo.j a, and t h e m s e l v e s became known as Sesewopa. ( i b i d . : 110; e m p h a s i s mine) The a c c o u n t o f t h e Bepehupa l i n e a g e t h u s r e v e a l s a v i o l a t i o n o f t h e a g n a t i c p r i n c i p l e . C o n s i d e r , now, t h e B e r e k i p a l i n e a g e : B o t h t h e name ' B e r e k i p a ' and t h e i r own e r a h u , t h e s i m b o r o p l a n t , were a d o p t e d ( i n c i r c u m s t a n c e s w h i c h we c o u l d n o t o b t a i n ) f r o m t h e s o - c a l l e d ' p e o p l e ' o f b o t h t h e m o t h e r o f t h e s e n i o r h o u s e h o l d e r , and o f t h e p a t r i l i n e a l a n c e s t o r o f t h e o t h e r h o u s e h o l d e r s . ( i b i d . ) The a m b i g u i t y o f o r i g i n i s h i g h l y e v i d e n t i n t h i s c a s e , s i n c e i t i s l e f t u n d e t e r m i n e d w h i c h r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n ( t h e m o t h e r o f t h e s e n i o r h o u s e h o l d e r o r t h e p a t r i l i n e a l a n c e s t o r ) i s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h w h i c h s y m b o l ( c l a n name o r p l a n t emblem). The A r e h u l i n e a g e a l s o u s e s t h e p l a n t emblem 's i m b o r o g r a s s ' , " . . . i n a d d i t i o n t o t h e i r own t o p u ( f i g ? ) t r e e emblem" ( i b i d . ) . -23-Schwimmer records an incident that appears to have some bearing here. Some hae [erahu]become unusually popular, l i k e topu, a tree name which became a hae after a Sivepe woman died by f a l l i n g off a topu tree. She was given the necronym Topu-gori, after which a l l her descendants adopted topu as a hae. (Schwimmer 1973: 196) Rimoldi makes no mention of any l i n e a l connection between the Arehu lineage and their erahu, topu. If, as Schwimmer states, this erahu or hae became "unusually popular", i t is not unreason-able to suppose no l i n e a l connection exists. What the analysis of Rimoldi's and Crocombe & Hogbin's para-digms reveals is a disjunction of the sort long recognized for Highland societies (cf. Barnes 1962, Langness 1964, de Lepervanche 1967), a disjunction between the l o g i c a l outworking of p a t r i l i n e a l descent on the one hand, and the composition of the actual pheno-menal groupings on the other. III. Williams' Paradigm' Williams divided the Orokaiva into tribes according to the l i n g u i s t i c divisions made by Chinnery & Beaver (1916). Thus the tribes (see map I ) are: 1. Binandele and Jeve-Buje, 2. Tain-Dawara, 3. Aiga, 4. Yega, 5. Sauha, 6. Sangara, 7. Dirou, 8. Wasida, and 9. Hunjara (Williams 1930: 6). Williams stressed - 2 4 -t h a t t h e above d i v i s i o n s were n o t h a r d and f a s t . Many o f t h e above t r i b e s c o u l d be f u r t h e r d i v i d e d i n t o " m i n o r g r o u p s " , e.g. t h e S a n g a r a c o u l d be d i v i d e d i n t o d i s t i n c t h a l v e s , t h e Kombu-S a n g a r a on t h e e a s t and t h e Ato-Pekuma on t h e we s t ( i b i d . : 1 5 1 ) . I n a d d i t i o n t o r e c o g n i z i n g a number of i n t e r n a l d i v i s i o n s , W i l l i a m s s t a t e d t h a t : ...we may n o t r e g a r d t h e n i n e t r i b e s as so many w a t e r - t i g h t c o m p a r t m e n t s . D i s p e r s a l and m i g r a t i o n have b r o u g h t a b o u t some b l e n d i n g , and i t i s n o t a l w a y s e a s y t o draw t h e l i n e b e t w e e n any two of t h e n i n e . T h e r e a r e un-d o u b t e d a f f i n i t i e s , f o r i n s t a n c e , b e -tween t h e A i g a and t h e i r n e i g h b o u r s t h e H u n j u v a r e h u ( o f t h e W a s i d a t r i b e ) on t h e s o u t h , and a l s o b e t w e e n t h e A i g a and B i n a n d e l e o f t h e R i v e r Mambara on t h e n o r t h . ( i b i d . ) 4 N o t w i t h s t a n d i n g some " p a r t i a l b l e n d i n g " o f t r i b e s , W i l l i a m s s u m m a r i z e s t h e f o l l o w i n g c r i t e r i a by w h i c h one t r i b e c a n be d i s t i n g u i s h e d f r o m a n o t h e r : 1. a common t e r r i t o r y , 2. c e r t a i n i d i o s y n c r a s i e s o f c u s t o m ( e . g . d r e s s ) , 3. a d i s t i n c t d i a l e c t , and 4. i t s common e n m i t i e s ( i b i d . : 1 5 6 ) . The f o u r t h c r i t e r i o n W i l l i a m s c o n s i d e r e d p r i m a r y ; t r i b e s a r e d e f i n e d by who t h e y a r e n o t w i t h r e g a r d s t o c o n f l i c t . However, t h e r e i s y e t a f i f t h c r i t e r i o n h a v i n g t o do w i t h a m i t y , t h e s h a r i n g o f a common name: I n t h e l a r g e s t g r o u p s , as we see them, t h e r e i s no r e c o g n i t i o n w i t h i n t h e g r o u p i t s e l f o f a common name; b u t as we d e s c e n d t h e s c a l e we r e a c h a p o i n t where s u c h a name comes i n t o u s e , where t h e members of -25-t h e g r o u p a r e a b l e t o s a y "We a r e so and s o 1 . Among t h e O r o k a i v a we r e a c h t h i s s t a g e when we come t o t h e t r i b e s . They a r e i n f a c t t h e l a r g e s t u n i t s w h i c h a r e c o n s i s t e n t l y a b l e t o name t h e m s e l v e s . I w o u l d s u g g e s t t h e r e f o r e t h a t t h e use o f a common name, i m p l y i n g as i t does a r e c o g n i t i o n o f a m i t y , i s a v e r y e s s e n t i a l f a c t o r i n t h e i n d i v i d u a l i t y o f t h e t r i b e . ( i b i d . : 160) I f a common name i s one o f t h e e s s e n t i a l c r i t e r i a f o r d e t e r m i n i n g t r i b a l d e f i n i t i o n , i t m i g h t t h e n be a s k e d what t h e c r i t e r i a f o r s h a r i n g a name i t s e l f m i g h t be. To a n t i c i p a t e , W i l l i a m s ' o r d e r i n g o f t h e " s m a l l e r g r o u p i n g s " o f O r o k a i v a s o c i e t y beg t h e same q u e s t i o n , a q u e s t i o n w h i c h w i l l become t h e b a s i s f o r an e x t e n d e d a n a l y s i s o f t h e O r o k a i v a p l a n t emblem. W i l l i a m s was u n a b l e t o f i n d a s u i t a b l e n a t i v e t e r m f o r what he c a l l e d a " c l a n " . Among t h e A i g a t h e n e a r e s t a p p r o a c h seems t o be t h e e x p r e s s i o n e m b o - j a v o , l i t . 'man-name'; b u t t h i s m i g h t s t a n d i n a n o t h e r c o n -t e x t f o r t h e man's p e r s o n a l name. Among t h e B i n a n d e l e t h e r e i s a more d e f i n i t e term,' o r o -be, ' t h e t r u e o r o ' ( t h e u s u a l m e a ning o f o r o i s men's h o u s e ) . I n t h e S a n g a r a d i a l e c t a word a r a h a s t a n d s f o r e i t h e r a v i l l a g e c l e a r -i n g o r a c l a n . ( i b i d . : 101) W i l l i a m s opened h i s d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n o f the c l a n by s t a t i n g t h a t i t " . . . i s a f a i r l y w e l l - d e f i n e d g r o u p " ( i b i d . ) . As s u c h i t i s " p a t r i a r c h a l i n c o n s t i t u t i o n ; i t d e v e l o p s d i r e c t l y f r o m t h e f a m i l y , i n w h i c h t h e f a t h e r i s u n d i s p u t e d m a s t e r " ( i b i d . ) . B u t , h a v i n g s a i d t h i s , W i l l i a m s i m m e d i a t e l y moved i n t o -26-a discussion of clan formation, a discussion which throws the whole question of " d e f i n i t i o n " into a new l i g h t : "As the multi-plying family merges into the clan i t is not always easy to set a l i m i t or a d e f i n i t i o n " ( i b i d . : 102). Shifting to an examination of the dynamics of clan formation, Williams again focused on the symbolic aspects of group d e f i n i t i o n , the sharing of a name: "...when the descendants of one man come to be known regularly by a d i s t i n c t i v e name, i t may be said that they constitute a new clan" ( i b i d . ) . Related to this process of group d e f i n i t i o n is the plant emblem (in the Aiga d i a l e c t , heratu), from which the clan name may or may not be derivative ( i b i d . : 122-123). Now, new clans form continually ( i b i d . : 102); and, in the main, this process is conditioned ecologically. The Orokaiva are, f i r s t and foremost, h o r t i c u l t u r a l i s t s , their p r i n c i p a l staple crop being taro (Colocasia sp. and Xanthosoma sp.). In the absence of f e r t i l i z e r s , the Orokaiva continually require new garden land, either previously ungardened, or old garden land that has been l e f t fallow for some time. A consequence of this form of horticulture is that garden land frequently becomes distant enough to warrant families "hiving o f f " to form new settlements. More recently, Schwimmer notes that, though l i v i n g together in more enduring villages,"' families s t i l l maintain "garde'n houses" in order to remain conveniently closer to their gardens (Schwimmer 1973: 89). New settlements may also form as -27-the r e s u l t of ' i n t e r - c l a n ' q u a r r e l s ( e m b o g i ) , or the f e a r o f s o r c e r y ( W i l l i a m s 1930: 102). For w h a t e v e r r e a s o n though, the f o r m a t i o n of a new s e t t l e -ment ( o f t e n o n l y a n u c l e a r f a m i l y ) i n i t i a t e s the p r o c e s s of c l a n f o r m a t i o n . As W i l l i a m s o b s e r v e d : So l o n g as th e y r e t a i n t h e i r o r i g i n a l c l a n name the s e t t l e m e n t can o n l y be r e g a r d e d as an o f f s h o o t ; but when th e y wax i n numbers and b e g i n to be known by a s e p a r a t e name, they become i p s o f a c t o a new c l a n . ( i b i d . ) So f a r , W i l l i a m s ' d a t a s u g g e s t s a sy s t e m whereby p a t r i l i n e a g e a r e c o n t i n u a l l y s e g m e n t i n g p r i m a r i l y i n r e s p o n s e to e c o l o g i c a l demands. However, W i l l i a m s found O r o k a i v a c h i l d r e n to be on such i n t i m a t e and f r i e n d l y f o o t i n g w i t h t h e i r m a t e r n a l r e l a t i v e s t h a t t h e y were " v e r y r e a d y " to i d e n t i f y t h e m s e l v e s w i t h t h e i r m a t e r n a l r e l a t i v e s v i s a v i s m a t e r n a l p l a n t emblems. As a d u l t s , t o o , W i l l i a m s f o u n d the O r o k a i v a u s i n g b o t h m a t e r n a l and p a t e r n a l h e r a t u ( i b i d . : 1 14). W i l l i a m s c o n s e q u e n t l y q u a l i f i e d h i s ' u n i -l i n e a l b i a s ' by n o t i n g t h a t "... the sy s t e m , a l t h o u g h p a t r i l i n e a l i n t h e o r y , was a l m o s t b i l a t e r a l jLn e f f e c t " ( i b i d . : 9 4 ) . F u r t h e r ( i n t o h i s d i s c u s s i o n , W i l l i a m s remarked t h a t : " . . . c l a n exogamy i s n ot a h a r d and f a s t r u l e " ( i b i d . : 131), e.g., men and women of the same c l a n o f t e n m a r r i e d ( i b i d . : 132).. W i l l i a m s t h u s found the o u t w o r k i n g o f a r u l e of p a t r i l i n e a l i t y v i o l a t e d w i t h r e s p e c t to the use of h e r a t u , c l a n exogamy, and the r e s u l t a n t c l a n member s h i p s . -28-The r o l e o f p l a n t emblems i n the d e f i n i t i o n of s o c i a l g r o u p s has a l s o been shown to be p a r t of Crocombe & H o g b i n ' s and R i m o l d i ' s p a r a d i g m s . L i t t l e has been s a i d up to t h i s p o i n t t hough, about the O r o k a i v a system of p l a n t emblem c l a s s i f i c a t i o n p e r s e . In e x a m i n i n g Schwimmer's p a r a d i g m , the c o m p l e x i t y o f the r e l a t i o n s h i p between h_ae or h e r a t u ( I use b o t h , as b o t h mean " p l a n t emblem"**) and s o c i a l g r o u p i n g s , - a s w e l l as the c e n t r a l p l a c e o f p l a n t emblems i n the p r o c e s s of O r o k a i v a group f o r m a t i o n , w i l l b e g i n to be more c l e a r l y s e e n . IV. Schwimmer's P a r a d i g m Schwimmer's schema f o r c o n c e p t u a l i z i n g O r o k a i v a s o c i a l g r o u p i n g s i s a g a i n somewhat d i f f e r e n t from t h o s e p a r a d i g m s a l -r e a d y c o n s i d e r e d . Schwimmer employs R i m o l d i ' s d e l i n e a t i o n of t h e l i n e a g e as h i s d e p a r t u r e p o i n t : I t i s c e r t a i n l y t r u e t h a t we f i n d i m p o r t a n t u n i t s i n t e r m e d i a t e between the e x t e n d e d f a m i l y and the l o c a l c l a n g r o u p . . . B u t the term ' l i n e a g e ' might be d e c e p t i v e u n l e s s we d e f i n e i t more c l o s e l y . (Schwimmer 1973: 194) Because the f o u r J e g a s e ' l i n e a g e s ' i n S i v e p e r e v e a l no s t r i c t a d h e r e n c e to p a t r i l i n e a l i t y i n t h e i r c o m p o s i t i o n , Schwimmer p r e f e r s the d e s i g n a t i o n " c l a n segment" ( i b i d . ) . As f o r the " c l a n " d e s i g n a t i o n i t s e l f , Schwimmer s t a t e s : -29-. . . t h e f a c t t h a t t h e s e g r o u p i n g s t o g e t h e r c a l l t h e m s e l v e s a c l a n ( j avo wahai) does not i m p l y the a c t u a l e x i s t e n c e of a g n a t i c c o n n e c t i o n . The term means 'one name', and t h a t i s a l l t h e y s h a r e , e x c e p t f o r u t e r i n e l i n k s w h i c h b u t t r e s s the s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s between them. ( i b i d . : 196; emphasis mine) Once a g a i n we f i n d t h e s h a r i n g of a' common name s t r e s s e d as a c r u c i a l c r i t e r i o n f o r membership. But i t i s t h i s v e r y c r i t e r i o n w h i c h c r e a t e s p r o b l e m s f o r Schwimmer's a n a l y s i s , as I s h a l l now a t t e m p t to d e m o n s t r a t e . Schwimmer, h a v i n g i d e n t i f i e d ' c l a n s ' and ' c l a n segments', t u r n s n e x t to O r o k a i v a p l a n t emblem (hae) c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s . ... the term hae i s f r e q u e n t l y used to d e s c r i b e a s o c i a l group made up of p e r s o n s s h a r i n g a hae, and t h a t the group to w h i c h i t i s a p p l i e d i s not the c l a n ( j a v o wahai) but a s m a l l e r f o r m a t i o n o f t e n about the same  s i z e as a ' c l a n segment' o r ' l i n e a g e ' . As s u c h , t h e y a r e p r o b a b l y the b a s i c l a r g e r u n i t o f O r o k a i v a s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e . ( i b i d . : emphasis mine) The above d i s t i n c t i o n i s h i g h l y p r o b l e m a t i c , f o r Schwimmer a l s o n o t e s t h a t : " C l a n and p e r s o n a l names a r e commonly p l a n t names and o f t e n the hae of a c l a n and i t s name a r e i d e n t i c a l " ( i b i d . : emphasis m i n e ) . W i l l i a m s , t o o , s u g g e s t e d t h a t , b e c a u s e j u s t o v e r f o r t y - f o u r per c e n t of h i s sample l i s t of c l a n names and t h e i r h e r a t u c o r r e s p o n d e d ( e . g . Eugahu/Euga, H o j a v a h i j e / H o j a v a , e t c . ) -30-...I think the clan and i t s heratu come into being simultaneously and in this manner: an individual secedes from the parent clan and his family grows into an independent clan. This clan becomes known by i t s founder's name and adopts for emblem a plant bearing the same name, or one similar to i t . (Williams 1930: 122) How can hae groupings then be distinguished from clans? Since plant emblem i d e n t i f i c a t i o n enters in at every l e v e l of inclusion, 'clan', 'clan segment', 'sub—clan', 'lineage', and so on, how are we to make sense of this multitude of cross-cutting i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s ? More s p e c i f i c a l l y , how do we decide when those sharing a hae constitute a 'clan', 'clan segment', etc.? D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of Orokaiva society on the basis of shared names indeed becomes problematical. How problematic the sharing of names can be is best i l l u -strated through a consideration, given the above discussion, of Schwimmer's assertion that: In contrast to the clap and clan-segment... the plant emblem group alone has the nature of a true kinship group. (Schwimmer 1973: 197) There are two pertinent issues touched upon in the quotation above: a) the d i s t i n c t i o n that Schwimmer makes between two kinds of groupings (clan and clan segment/plant emblem group); b) Schwimmer's reference to "the nature of a true kinship group" in characterizing the normative implications that sharing.a plant emblem has. These issues are now considered turn. -31-V. P l a n t Emblem G r o u p i n g s The d i s t i n c t i o n Schwimmer makes b e t w e e n " t h e c l a n and c l a n -segment" on t h e one. han d , and t h e " p l a n t emblem g r o u p " on t h e o t h e r , i s q u e s t i o n a b l e on s e v e r a l c o u n t s . Schwimmer has a l r e a d y s t a t e d t h a t t h e c l a n name i s an i m p o r t a n t s y m b o l o f p o l i t i c a l i d e n t i f i c a t i o n ( i b i d . : 1 9 6 ) . But he has a l s o p o i n t e d o u t t h a t " . . . o f t e n t h e hae o f a c l a n and i t s name a r e i d e n t i c a l " ( i b i d . ; e m p h a s i s m i n e ) . W i l l i a m s p r o p o s e d t h a t t h e c l a n and i t s h e r a t u "...came i n t o b e i n g s i m u l t a n e o u s l y " ( W i l l i a m s 1925: 419-20; e m p h a s i s m i n e ) . I f t h e s e s t a t e m e n t s a r e t a k e n t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e p r o b l e m s o f d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n e n c o u n t e r e d i n t h e o t h e r p a r a d i g m s , t h e r e seems r e a s o n a b l e c a u s e t o d o u b t t h e v a l i d i t y o f t h e d i s t i n c -t i o n Schwimmer w i s h e s t o make. On t h e o t h e r h a n d , a l l f o u r p a r a d i g m s a p p e a r t o be i n a g r e e -ment on a t l e a s t one p o i n t : No m a t t e r how O r o k a i v a s o c i e t y i s p e r c e i v e d t o be o r g a n i z e d , p l a n t emblems a r e i n v o l v e d a t a l l l e v e l s o f i n c l u s i o n ( s a v e f o r " t r i b a l " d i v i s i o n s made by W i l l i a m s ) . I w o u l d t h e r e f o r e p r o p o s e t h e f o l l o w i n g ' w o r k i n g ' p r o p o s i t i o n : A l l O r o k a i v a g r o u p i n g s a r e p l a n t emblem g r o u p i n g s . By a d o p t i n g t h e above p r o p o s i t i o n I do n o t mean t o u n c o n -d i t i o n a l l y deny t h e e x i s t e n c e o f s u c h c a t e g o r i e s as " c l a n " , " c l a n b r a n c h " , e t c . . I t i s n e v e r t h e l e s s my c o n t e n t i o n t h a t , i f any a d v a n c e s a r e t o be made i n u n d e r s t a n d i n g and m o d e l l i n g O r o k a i v a s o c i a l i t y , a t t e n t i o n must be f o c u s e d on t h e p r i m a r y s y m b o l -32-of O r o k a i v a s o c i a l i t y , the p l a n t emblem. Four p a r a d i g m s of s o c i a l i t y have been c o n s i d e r e d : W i l l i a m s ' , ' Crocombe & H o g b i n ' s , R i m o l d i ' s , and Schwimmer's. The p e r i o d t h e s e f o u r p a r a d i g m s span i s o v e r f o u r d e c a d e s ^ c o u l d the v a r i a t i o n s o b s e r v e d between p a r a d i g m s be t h e r e f o r e e x p l a i n e d as a r e f l e c t i o n of s o c i a l p r o c e s s ? Not p e r t i n e n t l y s o . N o t w i t h -s t a n d i n g the i n e v i t a b l e changes b r o u g h t about by f i r s t B r i t a i n ' s and. t h e n A u s t r a l i a ' s c o l o n i a l a d m i n s t r a t i o n , what makes t h e s e f o u r p a r a d i g m s c o m p a r a b l e a p a r t from any i n q u i r i e s i n t o o r g a n i z a t i o n a l t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s o v e r time i s t h a t they a l l a r r i v e a t the same, p o i n t . F o r when each p a r a d i g m i s s e t a g a i n s t the d a t a t h e r e i s r e v e a l e d a d i s j u n c t i o n between what i s i d e n t i f i e d as p a t r i l i n e a l d e s c e n t on the one hand, and p r a c t i c e on the o t h e r . Thus the s h a r i n g o f a name i s c o n s i s t e n t l y t a k e n to be i n d i c a t i v e of a group t h a t i s " t h e r e " ; and t h e v a r i o u s p e r m u t a t i o n s o f name s h a r i n g a r e f l e c t i o n of d i f f e r e n t s o r t s o f g r o u p s ( c l a n s , l i n e a g e s , e t c . ) . E ach p a r a d i g m , to v a r y i n g d e g r e e s d e s i g n a t e s p a t r i l i n e a l d e s c e n t as an o r g a n i z i n g p r i n c i p l e g o v e r n i n g the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h , and t r a n s m i s s i o n o f , names. And i n each p a r a d i g m an e x p l a n a t i o n b a s e d on p a t r i l i n e a l d e s c e n t i s found l a c k i n g . Not o n l y do i n c i d e n t s , such as the S i v e p e woman who d i e d f a l l i n g out of a t o p u t r e e , g i v e r i s e to new p l a n t emblems; t h e r e i s a l s o a p r o p e n s i t y f o r O r o k a i v a i n d i v i d u a l s to t a k e to t h e m s e l v e s an i n d i v i d u a l hae ( W i l l i a m s 1925: A 21 ; 1930: 124-25). C u l t u r a l - 3 3 -i n n o v a t i o n as p a r t of the p r o c e s s of O r o k a i v a s o c i a l i t y i s by and l a r g e e x c l u d e d from the c o n s i d e r e d p a r a d i g m s o f o r d e r . R e c o u r s e to p a t r i l i n e a l d e s c e n t a l s o f a i l s to a c c o u n t f o r the f a c t t h a t O r o k a i v a i n d i v i d u a l s h o l d and m a i n t a i n i d e n t i f i -c a t i o n w i t h a number of p l a n t eniblems at any g i v e n t i m e . Schwimmer r e c o r d s t h a t , i n the v i l l a g e of S i v e p e , "...most i n d i v i d u a l s have about f i v e hae i n r e g u l a r u s e . I r e c o r d e d f o r t y - t w o hae i n a p o p u l a t i o n o f one hundred and t h i r t y - f i v e " (Schwimmer 1973: 196). We see, t h e n , a s i g n i f i c a n t p l u r a l i t y of i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s a v a i l -a b l e to each i n d i v i d u a l . W i t h r e g a r d s to f i l i a t i v e t r a n s m i s s i o n , Schwimmer s t a t e s : . T h e o r e t i c a l l y , a p e r s o n p a s s e s on h i s f a t h e r ' s , but not h i s mother's hae to the n e x t g e n e r a t i o n so t h a t the hae would form an a g n a t i c g r o u p . ( i b i d . ) T h i s s t a t e m e n t can be compared w i t h W i l l i a m s : The h e r a t u of the f a t h e r i s p a s s e d on by i n h e r i t a n c e , whereas t h a t of the mother i s not n o r m a l l y handed down beyond the g e n e r a t i o n of h e r o f f s p r i n g . ( W i l l i a m s 1930: 114) P r e s u m a b l y , Schwimmer assumes t h a t the f a t h e r ' s hae i s used to the e x c l u s i o n of the m o t h e r ' s . But W i l l i a m s o b s e r v e d t h a t " . . . a man u s e s both, the p a t e r n a l and the m a t e r n a l h e r a t u " ( i b i d . ) . To s u g g e s t t h a t " . . . t h e hae would form an a g n a t i c g r o u p " i s t h e r e -f o r e e r r o n e o u s , i r r e s p e c t i v e o f whether or n o t m a t e r n a l hae a r e t r a n s m i t t e d "beyond the g e n e r a t i o n of her o f f s p r i n g " . -34-We find the above 'rule' of transmission in any case qu a l i f i e d by Schwimmer himself: "...there were in.fact several cases of uterine transmission for more than one generation, especially where marriages were ux o r i l o c a l " (Schwimmer 1973: 196). Taken together with Williams' data (see above), i t might there-fore be more accurate, following F i r t h (1957), to characterize the f i l i a t i v e transmission of Orokaiva plant emblems as ambilateral, i . e . , both mother and father are feasible for hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n 1 " "...but' some s e l e c t i v i t y i s possible, with difference of emphasis" (F i r t h op. c i t . : 216) . 7 I have suggested that, in order to move beyond the explana-tory limitations of the existing paradigms of order, we begin by recognizing a l l Orokaiva groupings as plant emblem groupings. Since plant emblems appear to enter in at a l l levels of inclusion (save the " t r i b e " ) , adopting this proposition a l l ows the analysis to side-step the problems associated with d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g d i f f e r -ent kinds of plant emblem groups according to the categories "clan", "clan branch", "lineage", and so on. I would now make a further s t i p u l a t i o n , that attempts to conceptualize plant emblem groups as descent groups be abandoned, for we may conclude from the above discussion that hae are not properly idioms of descent. The assertion that Orokaiva plant emblems are not properly idioms of descent, and that plant emblem groups are not descent -35-groups, p a r a l l e l s Rohatynskyj's analysis of Omie plant emblems. Rohatynskyj noted that Omie anie designations appear on the surface equivalent to descent-ordered clans: Anie, as a c u l t u r a l construct, lends i t -self most readily to this equivalence as i t incorporates the aspect of ident i t y , in that each adult becomes s o c i a l l y i d e n t i f i e d with a given anie; s o l i d a r i t y , in that people having common p o l i t i c a l interests and rights in land, often co-resident upon that land, are thought of -as sharing an anie; and continuity through the generations, in that anie are a v a i l -able to the individual as a result of a f i l i a t i v e t i e . (Rohatynskyj op. c i t . : 35; emphasis mine) The Omie, says Rohantynskyj, understand that their plant emblem system of c1 a s s i f i c a t i o n could be employed to create the r e a l i t y of a descent-based s o c i a l order ( i b i d . ) . However, ...this feature of the anie as operating in Omie soc i a l organization is held as a l o g i c a l p o s s i b i l i t y that can be exploited only in verbal presentation. The real limitations of the concept, that is i t s actual organizational l i m i t s are quite different and a great deal more complicated. ( i b i d . : 36) It would appear that Orokaiva hae, l i k e Omie anie, are apparently capable of being presented as 'looking l i k e ' a descent construct, inasmuch as they incorporate aspects of identity, s o l i d a r i t y , and continuity. But, again l i k e anie, the actual engagement of hae for the purposes of social i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and the delineation of s o c i a l i t y i s both different and "a great deal more complicated." -36-And the way towards penetrating that complexity? Through a closer examination of the symbolic nature of name sharing, p a r t i c u l a r l y plant emblem names. I choose this course of i n -vestigation because, being grounded in the cognitive and ideo-l o g i c a l d e f i n i t i o n s of Orokaiva social relations, i t promises to take us further in understanding something of the dynamic, processual nature of Orokaiva group formation, and the r e l a t i o n of plant emblems to that process. As an entry into this form of analysis I should l i k e to turn to the second issue mentioned above, and examine what Schwimmer means when he says the plant emblem group "...alone has the nature of a true kinship group" (Schwimmer 1973: 197). We can approach this problem by f i r s t considering the context in which the "nature of a true kinship group" is invoked. Schwimmer describes how, though he was able to obtain a sizable l i s t of people who l i v e d in Sivepe and surrounding v i l l a g e s around 1915, he could not learn anything about how these people were genea-l o g i c a l l y related. However, informants were able to t e l l me the hae of these ancestors, and these hae proved to be the only evidence for statements that A and B 'must have been closely related' or 'cannot have been closely related' ...Therefore we should not be surprised that the hae occurs prominently in the Orokaiva marriage rules with regard to incest and exogamy. (ibid.) Concerning the relationship between hae and exogamy and incest, Schwimmer equates sharing a hae with siblingship: -37-A rule that was expressed to me often and fo r c i b l y was that people should not marry i f they share a paternal or maternal hae. ...If two people are i d e n t i f i e d with the same plant...they are si b l i n g s ; they can-not possibly be'anything else. ( i b i d . : 206) The point I would l i k e to make here is that Orokaiva s i b l i n g -ship, and by extension Orokaiva 'kinship', is primarily discussed by Schwimmer as a normative system, as opposed to a genealogically defined grid. That i s , he is focusing on the rules and regulations which actors should follow i f their, behaviour is to be accepted by other members of society as proper. This normative system is associated with a set of symbols—kinship terms, hae, clan names (in general, names that are shared)--and meanings (cf. Schneider 1971: 37). What is therefore being referred to when hae are claimed to demonstrate the "true nature of a kinship group" i s the moral content of these symbols of s o c i a l i t y . I wish to focus on the moral content of hae symbolism; I shal l sum up and explain why. The transmission, sharing, and acquiring of hae has been shown to be complex, as well as central to understanding Orokaiva s o c i a l i t y . I have argued that defining Orokaiva groupings by employing terms such as 'clan', 'lineage', etc. g according to the c r i t e r i o n of p a t r i l i n e a l i t y i s an inadequate and far too s t a t i c approach to dealing with Orokaiva s o c i a l i t y : the u t i l i t y of descent-constructs must be challenged in their . application to the Orokaiva. Wagner, in fact, has challenged the very existence of - 3 8 -groups in the Highlands of New Guinea: Is.there something about t r i b a l society that demands resolution into groups? Or is the notion of "groups" a vague and i n -adequate description of something that could better be represented in another way? (Wagner 1974: 102) Wagner goes on. to say: Since the notion of the group i s our own, the problem finding such c r i t e r i a [for determining when such a concept is applicable and when i t is not] rests with us. Since a deliberate c o l l e c t i v e focus, a sense of common par t i c i p a t i o n and aware-ness, l i e s at the core of our notion (and of our motives for finding groups) our c r i t e r i a ought to emphasize this factor. ( i b i d . : 104) It is notions .such as 'a deliberate, c o l l e c t i v e focus', 'a sense of common pa r t i c i p a t i o n ' , a 'sense of common awareness' which l i e at the heart of that semantic domain invoked by the word "moral". It i s these notions which are at issue in the idea of a sense of community. We can, therefore, rewrite to say that an assemblage of people have a sense of community when they perceive a shared moral awareness of, a c o l l e c t i v e accept-ance of, and conformity to, moral obligation to each other. Introducing this notion of "community" requires some explanation. What does "community" mean? Can a notion of com-munity be applicable to the Orokaiva? It i s these two questions that I turn to in the f i n a l sections of this chapter. -39-VI . The Meaning of Community Perhaps the best entry into a discussion of the semantic universe s i g n i f i e d by the word "community" is an etymological one. In Latin, the accusative form of "community", communitat-em, "...was merely a noun of quality from communis, meaning 'fellowship, community of relations or feelings'; but in medieval Latin i t was, l i k e universitas, used concretely in the sense of a 'body of fellows or fellow townsmen', and this was i t s e a r l i e s t use in English" (O.E.D.: community). The word "community" did not, in, fact, take on the connotations of a 'quality or state' in the English language u n t i l two hundred years l a t e r , in the sixteenth century' ( i b i d . ) . What can thus be seen (but s h a l l not here be accounted for) i s an interesting semantic movement in the use of "community" Beginning in the Latin as a "noun of quality" connoting the quality of s o c i a l relationships (a sense of community is here implied) the use of the word then shifted to connote actual s o c i a l groups (the phenomenal order of community). The etymo-l o g i c a l development of "community" in the English has, however, displayed exactly the opposite trend: moving from a solely phenomenological connotation (in the 14th century "community" referred to e.g. a state, or organized society) to include the abstract sharing of certain q u a l i t i e s or char a c t e r i s t i c s (1878: the community of character; 1875: the community of interests and feelings; 1561: community of power) (O.E.D.; see also -40-Williams 1976: 65). It was in the 16th century that these two semantic domains began, and continue, to be expressed by the one word "community". A closer look at these two semantic domains w i l l nevertheless reveal that, far from co-existing harmoniously, the notion of community as a quality or state of being and the notion of community as a phenomenal ordering exist together in a relationship of tension. Invoking a sense of community suggests a shared conscious-ness of some quality(-ies) or state(s) of being. As such, one need not apprehend him/herself t o t a l l y in the other, but only in regard to what i s shared. A sense of community is thus negated by the apprehended absense of any shared quality(-ies) or state(s) of being. F i n a l l y , invoking a sense of community can be done independent of any spacial and temporal considerations - - i t i s spacially and temporally unbounded. Turner's notion of "communitas" indicates the experiential l i m i t s a sense of community can r e a l i z e : ...The bonds of communitas are a n t i -structural in that they are undiffer-entiated, equalitarian, d i r e c t , non-rational (though not i r r a t i o n a l ) , I-Thou or Essential We relationships, in Martin Buber's sense. (Turner 1974: 47) Taking "community" to sig n i f y a phenomenal order implies that .the community may be consciously apprehended "from the out-side" in terms of the individual actors that comprise i t , -41-independent of whether or not there is " i n t e r n a l l y " (or i n -digenously) perceived a shared sense of community.. "Community" as a substantive, concrete entity is invariably associated with some sort of organizing, structuring principle(s) and/or spacial and temporal constraints. A sense of community, therefore, stands in opposition to community as a phenomenal order with respect to the oppositions unstructured/structured undif f erentiated/dif f erentiated , spacially and temporally unbounded/specially and temporally bounded. But, as has been shown, both semantic domains are encompassed according to conventional English usage by the one word, "community". Community, then, e f f e c t i v e l y connotes neither one domain nor the other; rather, "community" connotes a process incorporating both aspects of s o c i a l i t y in a relationship of tension, a ten-sion in perception. It is a process akin to that expressed by Burridge for European or Western society: The ordered s t a b i l i t i e s of given roles, statuses and i d e n t i t i e s are in dynamic tension with the instruction to abandon current boundaries, enter a communitas or antistructure, and remake the moral-i t i e s . (Burridge 19791 160) -42-VII. The Orokaiva Plant Emblem as Symbol of Community The question that immediately comes to the fore i s : Can such a notion of community, implying a process of s o c i a l i t y involving the movement between a "consciousness of kind" and the r e a l i z a t i o n of that consciousness or 'sense of community' in a phenomenal ordering, be applicable to the Orokaiva? I would l i k e to show that the concept "community" developed here i s applicable to this Papuan people, that the concept "community" constitutes a useful approach to the re-evaluation of Orokaiva s o c i a l organization and especially the role of Orokaiva plant emblems in that process of so c i a l organization. If Schwimmer's ethnography is correct, the Orokaiva equate siblingship, or at least the moral imperatives associated with siblingship, with the sharing of hae (Schwimmer 1973: 206). We can therefore say that hae, as symbols of s o c i a l i t y , communicate the moral imperatives associated with siblingship; there i s a common awareness of something shared which has moral implications for the conduct of s o c i a l r e lations. Since Schwimmer has ex-tended the association of hae and siblingship to say that a plant emblem group "alone has the nature of a kinship group", and since the "nature" of a kinship group has to do with the normative expectations of membership, we can generalize to say that 'Orokaiva plant emblem i d e n t i f i c a t i o n has moral implications (cf. Bloch 1971). That is to say, plant emblems communicate -43-moral expectations. And the sharing of hae symbolizes a c o l l e c t i v e acceptance of, and conformity to, moral obligations one to another. We can therefore say that sharing a plant emblem communicates a sense of community. But.the word "community", as already argued, also connotes a phenomenal order. Is th i s , too, evidenced by the ethnography? Here we can i d e n t i f y the notion of community as a phenomenal order with what Williams meant by the Orokaiva "sympathy group". Characterized, i d e a l l y , by an atmosphere of "concord and r e s t f u l -ness" (Williams 1930: 315), members of the sympathy group conform to such virtues as l i b e r a l i t y , industry, helpfulness, a good-tempered nature, and so on ( i b i d . : 316-21). The c r i t e r i a for community then, includes, f i r s t l y , a sense of community: a c u l t u r a l l y shared " i n t e r n a l " sense of pa r t i c i p a t i o n i n , and moral awareness of, obligations one to another. Secondly, this internal consciousness i s made v i s i b l e to the outsider by i t s symbolic expression, through events, and through the indigenous ra t i o n a l i z a t i o n s (ideologies) offered by the actors to explain both symbols and events. In discussing the composition of Orokaiva sympathy groups, Williams observed that, though t y p i c a l l y synonymous with the " c l a n - v i l l a g e unit", the actual composition of the group was ".. . . not hard and fast: i t may fluctuate with circumstances . . . 1 1, e.g., when disputes arose ( i b i d . : 310). Once again, the -44-f l u c t u a t i n g n a t u r e of O r o k a i v a g r o u p i n g s i s r e m a r k e d upon. And i t i s t h i s , f l u x w h i c h , t a k e n t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e f a c t t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s a s c r i b e t o more t h a n one hae, s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e r e i s a l s o a t a c t i c a l d i m e n s i o n t o hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n ( c f . B l o c h o p . c i t . ) . I n i s o l a t i n g a t a c t i c a l d i m e n s i o n t o hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n i t must be k e p t i n mind t h a t t o e n u m e r a t e t h e v a r i o u s hae an i n d i v i d u a l l a y s c l a i m t o i s n o t t o e n u m e r a t e i p s o f a c t o t h e " g r o u p s " t o w h i c h an i n d i v i d u a l " b e l o n g s " . Hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n i s n o t a u t o m a t i c a l l y synonymous w i t h a f f i l i a t i o n t o a hae g r o u p -i n g . I t i s , r a t h e r , i n t h e i r use t h a t hae as s y m b o l s o f community make p e o p l e ' s a f f i l i a t i o n s e x p l i c i t . I r e t u r n t o t h i s t o p i c a g a i n i n C h a p t e r T h r e e . * * * The o b s e r v a t i o n t h a t O r o k a i v a g r o u p i n g s a r e c o n t i n u a l l y i n a s t a t e o f f l u x s u g g e s t s t h a t O r o k a i v a s o c i a l i t y i s b e t t e r u n d e r s t o o d as " e m e r g e n t " , r a t h e r t h a n " t h e r e " . And e mergent s o c i a l i t y i s h e r e b e s t c o n c e p t u a l i z e d , I w o u l d a r g u e , as a p r o c e s s i n v o l v i n g a r e l a t i o n s h i p o f t e n s i o n and c o n f l i c t b e t w e e n a s e n s e o f community on t h e one h a n d , and t h e phenomenal o r d e r I o f community on t h e o t h e r . F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e O r o k a i v a p l a n t emblem c o n s t i t u t e s a s y m b o l o f c ommunity. By v i r t u e o f h a v i n g b o t h t a c t i c a l and m o r a l im--45-p l i c a t i o n s , hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n i s thus seen as expressive of the tension invoked by "community". That i s , i f a designated number of Orokaiva i n d i v i d u a l s share a p a r t i c u l a r hae, t h i s can-not be taken as an automatic i n d i c a t i o n that a l l (or any of) these people w i l l c r y s t a l i z e i n t o some so r t of phenomenal c o l l e c t i v e under that hae; f o r , as has been s t r e s s e d , each w i l l have a l t e r n a t i v e hae (that some or a l l w i l l not share) that 9 they may "choose" to use i n s t e a d . I have argued f o r an a n a l y t i c c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n which views Orokaiva s o c i a l i t y as emergent community, and the Orokaiva p l a n t emblem as a symbol of community. Along what l i n e s , and according to what c o n s t r a i n t s , does community t h e r e f o r e emerge among the Orokaiva? This r e t u r n s us to a question asked e a r l i e r : What are the bases f o r hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n ? It i s t h i s question that Chapter Two addresses. -46-F o o t n o t e s t o C h a p t e r One ^ ' I n t e r e s t i n g l y , t h i s f o r m o f g r e e t i n g i s s t i l l f o u n d among t h e M a i s i n o f C o l l i n g w o o d Bay, Oro P r o v i n c e , P.N.G. ( J o h n B a r k e r 1982: p e r s o n a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n ) 2 ' The f i r s t l i n g u i s t i c s u r v e y s by E.W.P. C h i n n e r y and W.N. B e a v e r (1916) were a d o p t e d by W i l l i a m s ( 1 9 3 0 : 1 ) . F u r t h e r r e f i n e m e n t s o f t h e l i n g u i s t i c s c e n e have been made ( c f . W i l s o n 1 9 6 9 a , 1969b, D u t t o n 1 9 7 1 , Wurm 1 9 7 5 ) , b u t f o r t h e p u r p o s e s o f t h i s t h e s i s W i l l i a m s ' map ( s e e map I ) t o g e t h e r w i t h Schwimmer's ( s e e map I I ) w i l l a d e q u a t e l y r e p r e s e n t t h e g e o g r a p h i c a l and l i n g u i s t i c b o u n d a r i e s o f t h e O r o k a i v a . 3 ' The c l a i m t h a t t h e O r o k a i v a have a name f o r t h e " c l a n " i n t h e a b s t r a c t a g r e e s w i t h Schwimmer ( 1 9 7 3 : 196) b u t n o t w i t h W i l l i a m s ( 1 9 3 0 : 1 0 1 ) . 4 * From b o t h C h i n n e r y & B e a v e r ' s (1916) and W i l l i a m s ' (1930) a c c o u n t s , i t i s e v i d e n t t h a t , p r i o r to p a c i f i c a t i o n t h e r e was a g r e a t d e a l o f i n t e r t r i b a l w a r f a r e ( i s o r o ) , t h e p r i n c i p l e r a i s o n  d ' e t r e f o r m i g r a t i o n and i t s " b l e n d i n g " c o n s e q u e n c e s . ^' I t was s t a n d a r d c o l o n i a l p o l i c y t o o r g a n i z e t h e n a t i v e p o p u l a t i o n i n t o more permanent s e t t l e m e n t s ; s u c h s e t t l e m e n t s f a c i l i t a t e d , among o t h e r t h i n g s , t a x a t i o n , c e n s u s t a k i n g , c a s h c r o p p i n g , l a b o u r r e c r u i t m e n t , and n a t i v e p a t r o l i n g e n e r a l ( c f . L e g ge 1956, M a i r 1970, M u r r a y 1 9 1 2 ) . ^* I n c o n t r a s t t o W i l l i a m s ' use o f t h e A i g a w o r d , h e r a t u , f o r t h e p l a n t emblem, Schwimmer u s e s t h e W a s i d a t e r m , hae. ~*' T h i s i s n o t t o i m p l y t h a t hae g r o u p i n g s a r e a m b i l a t e r a l , and t h u s ramages ( F i r t h op. c i t . : 2 1 9 ) . I o n l y a d o p t t h e t e r m " a m b i l a t e r a l " as a means, i n t h e a b s e n c e o f more c o m p l e t e d a t a , t o p r o v i s i o n a l l y c l a s s i f y t h e f i l i a t i v e t r a n s m i s s i o n o f hae i n p r a c t i c e . g I am n o t c h a l l e n g i n g t h e v a l i d i t y o f p a t r i l i n e a l d e s c e n t i n a s m u c h as i t d e s i g n a t e s a c a t e g o r y o f p e o p l e ; I am c h a l l e n g i n g t h e n o t i o n t h a t O r o k a i v a s o c i e t y i s p a t r i l i n e a l i n i t s o r g a n i z a t i o n i n t o g r o u p s . _ 4 7 -Footnotes to Chapter One continued: ' It should be kept in mind that what appears to be choice " i n theory" may hot be choice " i n fact" (Scheffler 1966 550). The empirical problem here remains one of assessing the ecological and/or p o l i t i c a l constraints on theoretical choices in regards to hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n in the process of community formation (see also Sahlins 1965). 41? Map I Thumb KsteJa A» ^ Coonf 1/ W i l l i a m s 1930 •v Chapter Two The Orokaiva Plant Emblem: Towards an Ideology of Community -50-C h a p t e r Two I. I n t r o d u c t i o n One o f the i m p l i c a t i o n s stemming from our a n a l y s i s i n C h a p t e r One i s t h a t O r o k a i v a p l a n t emblems, as symbols o f community, do not s i g n i f y w e l l - d e f i n e d phenomenal o r d e r i n g s . T h i s i s be-c a u s e s o c i a l i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and a f f i l i a t i o n as e x p r e s s e d t h r o u g h hae symbolism i s n o t , pace Schwimmer (1973 : 175) "... an a u t o m a t i c r e s u l t o f f i l i a t i o n " , but p o t e n t i a l l y ambiguous. As B u r r i d g e o b s e r v e d f o r the Tangu: Though the m a n i p u l a t i o n o f p e o p l e i n r e l a t i o n to c a t e g o r i e s r e s u l t s i n tem-p o r a r y a m b i g u i t i e s , i n d i v i d u a l s have the o p p o r t u n i t y to e x e r c i s e t h e i r t a l e n t s and e a r n r e c o g n i t i o n f o r them. Membership of a f o r m a l d e s c e n t group would impose i m p o s s i b l e l i m i t a t i o n s . ( B u r r i d g e 1969: 70) The a f f i l i a t i v e ambience of the O r o k a i v a i n d i v i d u a l i s , l i k e t h a t o f t h e Tangu, one of p o t e n t i a l a m b i g u i t y . And i t I s w i t h i n t h i s ambience o f p o t e n t i a l a m b i g u i t y t h a t t h e p o l i t i c a l dynamic of O r o k a i v a s o c i a l i t y i s to be f o u n d . In t h e f i r s t s e c t i o n o f t h i s c h a p t e r I argue t h a t , i f the O r o k a i v a p l a n t emblem i s c o n s t r u e d as a symbol o f community, and i f O r o k a i v a community i s s u b j e c t to f l u x as a r e s u l t o f a f f i l i a t i v e a m b i g u i t y , the s t r u c t u r e o f t h i s a m b i g u i t y can be p e n e t r a t e d t h r o u g h an a n a l y s i s o f the i n d i g e n o u s e x e g e s e s a s -s o c i a t e d w i t h hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . 1 - 5 1 -I b e g i n my d e l i n e a t i o n o f a n O r o k a i v a ' i d e o l o g y o f c o m m u n i t y ' b y f i r s t e x a m i n i n g t h e w a y s i n w h i c h h a e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n i s i n d i g -e n o u s l y e x p l a i n e d , o r r a t i o n a l i z e d . R e v i e w i n g W i l l i a m s ' o r i g i n a l m a t e r i a l on O r o k a i v a p l a n t e m b l e m s , I s u g g e s t t h a t t h e d a t a p r e -s e n t e d c a n be f o r m a l l y d i v i d e d a c c o r d i n g t o t h r e e o r d e r i n g p r i n c i p l e s : l i n e a l i t y ( h a e d e s i g n a t e s a n a n c e s t o r o r p r e d e c e s s o r ) t e r r i t o r i a l i t y ( h a e d e s i g n a t e s , a • l o c a l i t y ) , a n d e x c h a n g e / c o m m e n -s a l i t y ( h a e d e s i g n a t e s a b i g - m a n o r l e a d e r ) . N o n e o f t h e s e t h r e e f o r m s o f r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n a r e s u f f i c i e n t i n t h e m s e l v e s f o r t h e e x p l a n a t i o n o f c o m m u n i t y f o r m a t i o n among t h e O r o k a i v a ; r a t h e r t h e y a r e s h o w n t o be ' i n t e r r e l a t e d . T h e f o r m a n d d i r e c t i o n o f my a n a l y s i s o f O r o k a i v a p l a n t e m b l e m r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n s i s d e r i v e d f r o m M c K e l l i n ' s a n a l y s i s o f M a n a g a l a s e " ^ k i n s h i p i d e o l o g y : •• L i n e a l i t y , t e r r i t o r i a l i t y , a n d commen-s a l i t y a n d e x c h a n g e , a r e t h r e e c r i t e r i a w h i c h c o m p o s e t j i e M a n a g a l a s e c o n c e p t o f k i n s h i p . C r i t e r i a o f r e c r u i t m e n t , g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p , a n d i n h e r i t a n c e a r e d e f i n e d b y t h e c o n j o i n i n g o f t h e s e c o n c e p t s . ' T h e i d e o l o g i c a l p r e m i s e o f k i n s h i p i s t h a t k i n s m e n s h a r e a j i d e [ s t r e n g t h ] a n d s i r u [ m o i s t u r e , f l u i d o r f l e s h ] . The t i e s o f i d e o l o g y a r e t h u s b a s e d on t h e p o l y t h e t i c r e l a t i o n s , among e a c h o f t h e s e p r i n c i p l e s i n t u r n ; t e r r i t o r i a l i t y b e c o m e s l i n e a l i t y t h r o u g h t h e t i e s o f e x c h a n g e a n d commen-s a l i t y w i t h a n c e s t o r s a n d p r e d e c e s s o r s who a r e a l s o c o n s o c i a t e s . The t i e o f s i r u o r a j i d e i s c o n s i s t e n t , t h o u g h i t s s o u r c e i s d i f f e r e n t i n e a c h d o m a i n . ( M c K e l l i n 1 9 8 0 : 2 3 2 ) F o l l o w i n g M c K e l l i n , I a n a l y s e O r b k a i v a n o t i o n s o f " s u b s t a n c e I a r g u e t h a t t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f l i n e a l i t y ^ t e r r i t o r i a l i t y a n d e x -c h a n g e / c o m m e n s a 1 i t y f o r m a l l y o r d e r O r o k a i v a i d e a s a b o u t t h e t r a n s m i s s i o n and s h a r i n g of " s u b s t a n c e " . I then move beyond the d a t a p r o p e r to s u g g e s t t h a t the O r o k a i v a t h e m s e l v e s may be c o n c e p t u a l i z i n g the s h a r i n g of hae i n terms o f s h a r e d " s u b s t a n c e " . I t h e r e f o r e f o r w a r d t h e p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t the c o n j o i n i n g of the p r i n c i p l e s of l i n e a l i t y , t e r r i t o r i a l i t y , and exchange/ c o m m e n s a l i t y t h r o u g h t h e O r o k a i v a n o t i o n s o f how hamo, a h i h i , a n c * i v o a r e s h a r e d c o n s t i t u t e s an ' i d e o l o g y of community'. And i t i s t h i s i d e a t i o n a l o r d e r , I a r g u e , which i n f o r m s the p r o c e s s o f s o c i a l i t y among the O r o k a i v a . I I . S o c i a l F l u x H i s t o r i c a l l y , the O r o k a i v a have e x i b i t e d a g r e a t d e a l of d emographic movement ( C h i n n e r y & Beaver 1916), stemming from a c o m b i n a t i o n of i n t e r - t r i b a l w a r f a r e , i n t e r - a n d i n t r a - g r o u p c o n f l i c t , the e x i g e n c i e s of a h o r t i c u l t u r a l economy, and, g r a p h i c a l l y i l l u s t r a t e d by the e x p l o s i o n of Mt. Lamington i n 1951 ( c f . Belshaw 195.1, K e e s i n g 1952 , Schwimmer 1969 , 19 7 7 ) , n a t u r a l d i s a s t e r s . From a d i a c h r o n i c p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e n , O r o k a i v a s o c i a l i t y can be seen to be c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y t e m p o r a l and f l u c t u a t i n g . S i m i l a r l y , from a s y n c h r o n i c p e r s p e c t i v e , i t i s not uncommon to w i t n e s s w i t h i n a v i l l a g e the s i m u l t a n e o u s op e r a . t i o n of b o t h f i s s i o n and f u s i o n p r o c e s s e s i n the f o r m a t i o n of s o c i a l g r o u p i n g s (Schwimmer 1972: 1 4 ) . As a c o n s e q u e n c e , the c a t e g o r i e s ' c l a n ' , ' s u b - c l a n ' , ' l i n e a g e ' , e t c . do not e a s i l y a p p l y to O r o k a i v a g r o u p i n g s . -53-The prevalence of s o c i a l flux in New Guinea societies has made description d i f f i c u l t . By conceptualizing Tairora society "as an organized flow", Watson attempts at a more meaningful explanation of Highland's so c i a l systems c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y termed "loose" or " f l e x i b l e " (see, for example, Cook 1966, Kaberry 1967, van der Leeden 1960, Watson 1965, Pouwer 1960, 1966a, 1966b, du Toit 1964, for the use of labels "loose" and " f l e x i b l e " ) . Focusing on the flux of persons from place to place, and group to group, Watson succinctl.y asks: "Is the struggle primarily for land or i s i t for people?"(Watson 1970: 120). Among the Tairora (located in the eastern portion of the Central Highlands), one finds big-men who, in competing for persons, seek to maintain networks large enough to compete in ceremonial exchanges, as well as to defend and/or assert themselves m i l i t a r i l y ( i b i d . : 119). The results are quite heterogeneous groups with respect to any c r i t e r i o n of kinship and/or descent. Schwimmer argues that the 'struggle for persons', comple-mented c u l t u r a l l y by the a v a i l a b i l i t y of potential a f f i l i a t i v e options, i s an integral aspect of Orokaiva s o c i a l i t y (Schwimmer 1972: 14). And the entry into this realm of a f f i l i a t i v e options? Here Watson also provides the direction, by asking ...how and why the Tairora manage to be a "kin-oriented" society with a semblance of descent-based grouping: e.g., what i s the  real emic or semantic component of their place-named groupings that I have herein termed " s i b " and " t r i b e " and have generally i d e n t i f i e d with descent? (Watson op. c i t . : 119; emphasis mine) -54-What I am s u g g e s t i n g i s t h a t s o m e t h i n g of the dynamics o f a f f i l i a t i v e o p t i o n s among the O r o k a i v a can be u n d e r s t o o d t h r o u g h an i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n t o t h e " s e m a n t i c component" of hae i n t h e i r s y m b o l i z a t i o n of community. In s u p p o r t ' o f t h i s s u g g e s t i o n I t u r n to f u r t h e r e t h n o g r a p h i c d a t a , t h i s time from amongst the n e i g h b o u r i n g K o i a r i - s p e a k e r s of Oro P r o v i n c e . W i l l i a m s o b s e r v e d t h a t , l i k e the O r o k a i v a , the K o i a r i of the S o g e r i P l a t e a u employ p l a n t emblems ( I d i ) . I d i , l i k e hae, a r e used i n t h e i r r e p r e s e n t a t i v e form as marks o f i d e n t i t y ( t o mark p a s s a g e a l o n g a t r a i l , o r t h r o u g h someone's l a n d ) as w e l l as to i d e n t i f y f o o d d i s p l a y e d f o r a f e a s t ( W i l l i a m s 1932: 55-6; 1925: 410, 4 1 3 ) . More i m p o r t a n t , however, i s what W i l l i a m s o b s e r v e d when he i n q u i r e d o f i n d i v i d u a l s what t h e i r I d i were: . . . t h e r e i s no l i t t l e v a g u e n e s s r e g a r d i n g the p l a n t emblems, and the p l a i n f a c t i s t h a t many a man i s q u i t e u n a b l e to name h i s I d i i f you ask him. I t i s o n l y a f t e r t h r a s h i n g the m a t t e r out i n f u l l d i s c u s -s i o n t h a t a group of i n f o r m a n t s a r e p r e -p a r e d to g i v e d e f i n i t e answers, and t h e n the doubt r e m a i n s whether t h e i r answers a r e r e l i a b l e . Some g r o u p s , i t would a p p e a r , have a l t e r n a t e I d i , f o r d i f f e r e n t i n f o r m -a n t s on d i f f e r e n t o c c a s i o n s have g i v e n names which f a i l e d to a g r e e , w h i l e i n o t h e r i n s t a n c e s two p l a n t s were named as a l t e r n a t i v e s a t one and the same t i m e . . . . The e x i s t e n c e o f such a l t e r n a t i v e s may p o i n t to m i n o r g r o u p s , but on s u c h p o i n t s I was u n a b l e to o b t a i n any s a t i s f a c t i o n . . ( i b i d . 1932: 55-56) . W i l l i a m s c o n c l u d e d from the v a g u e n e s s w i t h w h i c h the K o i a r i r e s p o n d e d to h i s e n q u i r e s t h a t : "The p e o p l e seem b o t h i g n o r a n t -55-and i n d i f f e r e n t regarding their I d i " ( i b i d . : 56). Further re-search among the c u l t u r a l l y similar Barai (Barker 1979) however, leads to quite different conclusions. In analysing group formation among the Barai, Barker de-scribes a highly complex and elaborate system of c u l t u r a l "idioms of relatedness", one class of which is the plant emblem, ani. Now the ani i s a shrub or plant which the Barai (incorrectly) say only grows on the hunting ground associated with a man, and is subsequently used by him as a symbol of identity (Barker op. c i t . : 38). But in addition to t h i s : "Ani appears in a number of forms, as a r e f l e c t i o n of recruitment, status, and as a symbol referring to named so c i a l units" ( i b i d . ) . If one looks at the nature of the status rules used as a rationale for the use of ani, one of the f i r s t observations i s that they provide for some degree of soc i a l maneuvering; they "...demonstrate the highly f l e x i b l e attitudes towards the i n -corporation of men" ( i b i d . : 100). This " f l e x i b l e attitude" is reflected in the four different glosses the Barai give for their p r i n c i p l e status rule, omi ahui  ja ruave. This statement the Barai glossed as: a) a boy comes out of his father's l i n e , b) a boy comes out of his father's body, c) a boy retraces his father's gardens, and d) a boy receives food f r om his father ( i b i d . : 102). In focusing on this "rule", Barker also discusses the range of meaning that "father" -56-(ornjL, w h i c h i s used i n t e r c h a n g e a b l y w i t h a s o i , b o t h " d e m o n s t r a t i v e " forms of " f a t h e r " ) has f o r the B a r a i : The man who c o n t r o l s a g a rden i s a s o i or omi of t h a t g a r d e n . However a s o i i s a l s o a n e t t l e - l e a f e d shrub w h i c h ' s t i n g s ' . T h i s ' h i t t i n g ' or ' b i t i n g ' i s a c h a r a c t e r -i s t i c of the f a t h e r ' s c o n t r o l o v e r h i s l a n d and h i s c h i l d r e n and p e r h a p s o v e r o t h e r s . The big-man i n o r a t o r y i s f o r c e f u l l y r e -f e r r e d to as ' f a t h e r ' . ( i b i d . : 100-101) F i n a l l y , and t h i s b r i n g s us back to W i l l i a m s ' c o n c l u s i o n t h a t the K o i a r i a r e " i g n o r a n t and i n d i f f e r e n t " c o n c e r n i n g t h e i r p l a n t emblems, B a r k e r o b s e r v e s the p o l i t i c a l i m p o r t of p u b l i c i d e n t i f i c a t i o n : . . . i t i s not u n t i l the i s s u e of.membership a r i s e s t h a t a named group can be formed. In t h i s way a t I h i r o a r e [ v i l l a g e ] the q u e s t i o n of 'which group do you b e l o n g to ...' p r e s e n t e d the young men w i t h an i n s o l u b l e p r o b l e m . I t became a m a t t e r o f  w h i c h big-man was w i t h i n e a r s h o t of the  p r o c e e d i n g s . Each big-man was c a p a b l e o f p r e s e n t i n g p l a u s i b l e r e a s o n s as to why 'X' was an 'A' by m a n i p u l a t i n g the r e c r u i t m e n t s t a t u s r u l e s . ( i b i d . : 139; emphasis mine) The above o b s e r v a t i o n s c l e a r l y r e v e a l s e v e r a l p o i n t s : They h i g h l i g h t the ambiguous membership s t a t u s o f i n d i v i d u a l s ; the c r e a t i v e use o f metaphors of i d e n t i f i c a t i o n ( f o r Chat i s how a f f i l i a t i o n w i t h a big-man i s e x p r e s s e d ) ; the n e c e s s i t y o f d e f i n i t i o n a l a m b i g u i t y f o r the p o l i t i c a l p r o c e s s ; the emergent n a t u r e o f B a r a i s o c i a l i t y . I s u g g e s t t h a t i n t h e i r i n v e s t i g a t i o n s o f p l a n t emblems, b o t h W i l l i a m s (1932) and B a r k e r (1979) o b s e r v e d a s i m i l a r s o r t - 5 7 -of phenomenon. Barker's gras,p of the p o l i t i c a l import that a public i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with a s p e c i f i c plant emblem has, i s exactly what Williams f a i l e d to recognize; yet an i d e n t i c a l conclusion can be read from Williams' data. Among the Buang, we again confront a society which, l i k e the Koiari-speaking (cf. Dutton 1971) groups already discussed, displays a p o l i t i c a l strategy in the verbalization of i d e n t i f i c a -tion. Individuals consistently assign themselves, and others, in a highly "variable" fashion, expressing exclusive a f f i l i a t i o n with various dgwa ( t e r r i t o r i a l l y - b a s e d groupings), i . e . , in one context with 'A', in another context with 'B', and perhaps 2 in yet another context with *C (Sankoff 1972: 555): It would appear that Buang soc i a l organiza-tion represents an extreme case of a pattern already well described for New Guinea — that of a highly f l e x i b l e s o c i a l . system which permits manipulation by individuals to suit their own ends, and in which individual choice does not upset the system; r a t h e r , i t i s an important part of the system. ( i b i d . : 560-61). Placing the manipulation of emic categories of inclusion/ exclusion within the social system, rather than seeing such mani-pulation as deviation from "normal" usage, constitutes an important step towards the analysis of Orokaiva hae in their capacity as symbols of community. Reflected, i n i t i a l l y , in the observation that Orokaiva individuals c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y claim more than one hae, the nature of a f f i l l a t i v e 'choice among the Orokaiva can be further penetrated through an inquiry into the -58-range of meanings available for the r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n of hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . This i s the p r i n c i p a l conclusion of this section. II I . L i n e a l i t y , T e r r i t o r i a l i t y , and Exchange/Commensality I The data presented in this section demonstrates the variable way in which the Orokaiva r a t i o n a l i z e their i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with s p e c i f i c plant emblems. This v a r i a b i l i t y i s nevertheless subject to certain structural constraints which, I argue, can be formalized according to three interrelated p r i n c i p l e s : l i n e a l i t y , t e r r i t o r -i a l i t y , and exchange/commensality. In delineating these three principles from the data we need to f i r s t deal with the assertion, made i n i t i a l l y by Williams (1925: 414; 1930: 117) and accepted by Schwimmer (1973: 196), that the hae (Ideally) refers only to an ancestor. This i n t e r -pretation i s suspect on a number of counts. Williams claimed that, throughout the whole of Orokaiva society, people often used the words ahij e and evob o when they spoke of their plant emblem (Williams 1930: 112, 117). These two words Williams glossed as "ancestor" ( i b i d . : 117). The word ahi.j e, in addition to being glossed as "ancestor", is also glossed by Williams as "grandparents (paternal and maternal); grandchildren; descendants; s i s t e r ' s children" ( i b i d . : 109). The denotative range of ahij e is thus far wider than simply "ancestor". Another q.ual i f ia t ion of Williams' interpretation is the nature of that interpretation i t s e l f . Rohantynskyj, in comparing -59-Omie p l a n t emblems w i t h W i l l i a m s ' d a t a , makes the p o i n t t h a t : W i l l i a m s ' f o r m u l a t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g the f u n c t i o n i n g of the p l a n t emblem among the O r o k a i v a g r o u p s , c a r e f u l as th e y a r e , r e m a i n s u s p e c t due to h i s t e n d e n c y  to e x p l a i n p r a c t i c e s as rude s u r v i v a l s  o f f o r m e r p r i s t i n e f o r m s . ( R o h a t y n s k y j op. c i t . : 37; emphasis mine) Something o f t h i s p r a c t i c e i s e v i d e n c e d by W i l l i a m s ' c o n c l u s i o n c o n c e r n i n g O r o k a i v a p l a n t emblem o r i g i n s : T h e r e i s i n my mind l i t t l e doubt as to  how the system came i n t o b e i n g . . . The c l a n ' s h e r a t u o r i g i n a t e s from the i n -d i v i d u a l h e r a t u o f i t s l e a d e r o r a n c e s t o r ; and the i n d i v i d u a l h e r a t u i s some p l a n t w h i c h s e r v e s as a t o k e n of i d e n t i t y be-cau s e i t b e a r s the name of i t s owner. ( W i l l i a m s 1930: 128-29; emphasis mine) Though p r o v i d i n g a g r e a t d e a l of e v i d e n c e c o n t r a r y to t h i s c o n -c l u s i o n , W i l l i a m s a p p e a r s to be s u g g e s t i n g t h a t i n i t i a l l y the s y s t e m o f p l a n t emblem c l a s s i f i c a t i o n was f a r more c o h e r e n t and l o g i c a l ; a c o n c l u s i o n we may, I b e l i e v e , s a f e l y s e t a s i d e . a) L i n e a l i t y Below a r e two examples i n w h i c h an a n c e s t o r i s g i v e n by the n a t i v e as the o r i g i n o f a p l a n t emblem. ( i ) ...a man of the A i g a c l a n J a h a r i , whose h e r a t u i s Saga, d e c l a r e s t h a t Saga was a man o f f l e s h and b l o o d , and g i v e s , w i t h c o n f i d e n c e , a g e n e a l o g y In w h i c h he p r o v e s hjlm to be h i s g r e a t - g r a n d f a t h e r . . ( i i ) So we f i n d two w i d e l y s e p a r a t e d b r a n c h e s of t h e c l a n Samanahu [ o r i g i n a l h e r a t u : the t r e e samana].... Both s e c t i o n s . . . t o l d the same t a l e of Samana. He was t h e i r common a n c e s t o r . . . one who, as i t c h a n c e d , a c q u i r e d h i s - 6 0 -name f r o m t h e f a c t t h a t he was b r o u g h t t o b i r t h u n d e r a samana t r e e . ( W i l l i a m s 1 9 2 5 : 416) S i n c e W i l l i a m s s u g g e s t e d t h a t i n s t a n c e s o f t h i s s o r t " c o u l d be m u l t i p l i e d " ( i b i d . ) , I d e s i g n a t e e x a m p l e s ( i ) and ( i i ) as i l l u s t r a t i n g a g e n r e o f n a t i v e e x p l a n a t i o n o r r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n f r o m w h i c h c an be f o r m a l l y d e l i n e a t e d t h e p r i n c i p l e l i n e a l i t y . The c h i e f c r i t e r i o n f o r i n c l u s i o n i n t h i s g e n r e i s any i n d i c a t i o n o f g e n e a l o g i c a l l y - b a s e d c o n n e c t i o n . I i n c l u d e i n t h i s g e n r e t h n a t i v e e x p l a n a t i o n s t h a t ' s u c h - a - h a e was my f a t h e r ' s ' , ' . . . m y m o t h e r ' s ' , o r any o t h e r r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n i n v o l v i n g t r a n s m i s s i o n i d e n t i f i c a t i o n f r o m t h e p a r e n t s ' o r h i g h e r g e n e r a t i o n s . b) T e r r i t o r i a l i t y W i l l i a m s a l s o r e c o r d e d a few r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n s t h a t r a n c o u n t e r t o h i s s t r e s s on t h e e q u a t i o n o f hae w i t h an a n c e s t o r I l i s t t h r e e e x a m p l e s b e l o w : ( i ) A f u g i t i v e s e c t i o n o f t h e S e r u g a h i j i c l a n , m a k i n g i t s way n o r t h w a r d t o w a r d s t h e R i v e r Mamba ra , s e t t l e d f o r some t i m e i n a p l a c e o f a b u n d a n t s a g o , and t h e r e a f t e r a b a n d o n e d t h e o r i g i n a l h e r a t u ; - T u y i r a , and a d o p t e d Amb e, o r s a g o . ( i i ) A c l a n o f t h e T a i n Dawara named G i r i r i had f o r i t s o r i g i n a l a n c e s t o r , one B o n o . Bu t t h e y we re c o n s t a n t l y u s i n g a c e r t a i n ha r dwood c a l l e d G i r i r i f o r b u i l d i n g , and c o n s e q u e n t l y t o o k t h i s f o r t h e i r h e r a t u and t h e i r c l a n name. ( . i i i ) The G o n i n i c l a n o f t h e T a i n Daware have f o r t h e i r h e r a t u , G o n i n i , and o c c u p y f o u r v i l l a g e s . I n one o f t h e s e , S i v a r i r i , t h e r e i s g r o w i n g a l a r g e t r e e o f t h e same name, and i t s i n h a b i t a n t s h ave t a k e n t h i s s p e c i e s I s i v a r i r i ] f o r t h e i r h e r a t u . ( i b i d . : 416 ) -61-The above t h r e e examples, I s u g g e s t , a r e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f a genre o f n a t i v e r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n w h i c h l i n k s t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h a h e r a t u or hae to a s p e c i f i c l o c a l e . U n l i k e the two examples i l l u s t r a t i n g t h e p r i n c i p l e o f l i n e a l i t y , no a n c e s t o r i s p o s i t e d as f i r s t a c q u i r i n g the name -- l a t e r to become a hae -- by v i r t u e of h i s o r h e r a s s o c i a t i o n ( b i r t h , o r some i n c i d e n t l i k e t h e women f a l l i n g out of a topu t r e e ( s e e C h a p t e r I ) ) w i t h some t r e e o r p l a n t . The h e r a t u a p p e a r s i n t h i s g e n r e t o come i n t o b e i n g t h r o u g h a c o r p o r a t e a c c e p t a n c e o f i t . But such a h e r a t u , r a t i o n a l i z e d by r e f e r e n c e to some l o c a l e , can s u r e l y come to be t r a n s m i t t e d to the nex t g e n e r a t i o n . And i f so, i t s s u b s e q u e n t r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n c o u l d p l a u s i b l y i n v o l v e the p r i n c i p l e of l i n e a l i t y , the h e r a t u i t s e l f b e i n g a s s o c i a t e d w i t h an a n c e s t o r . T h i s s o r t of t r a n s f o r m a t i o n i s i n f a c t i m p l i e d i n example ( i i ) under l i n e a l i t y and r e v e a l s an i m p o r t a n t p r o c e s s : the i n t e r l o c k i n g o f t e r r i t o r i a l i t y and l i n e a l i t y . I d e n t i f y i n g the i n t e r l o c k i n g of t h e s e two p r i n c i p l e s among the O r o k a i v a i s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h s i m i l a r f i n d i n g s e l s e w h e r e . De L e p e r v a n c h e , f o r example, s t r e s s e d the t e r r i t o r i a l b a s i s of a l i g n -ments and a r g u e d t h a t n a t i v e s t a t e m e n t s i d e n t i f i e d by the a n t h r o -p o l o g i s t as e v i d e n c i n g " d e s c e n t " would be b e t t e r u n d e r s t o o d as p o l i t i c a l s t a t e m e n t s h a v i n g a t e r r i t o r i a l b a s i s (de L e p e r v a n c h e 1967). . S t r a t h e r n , r e f l e c t i n g on the same p r o b l e m i n the a n a l y s i s of New G u i n e a H i g h l a n d s s o c i a l s y s t e m s , sums up: G i v e n the i m p o r t a n c e of t e r r i t o r i a l i t y and c o - r e s i d e n c e i n the d e f i n i t i o n of ' o p e r a n t -62-g r o u p s ' ...we s h o u l d e x p e c t to f i n d some s o r t of l o c a l i t y i d e o l o g y i n the c u l t u r a l s p h e r e , as w e l l as a d e s c e n t or k i n s h i p i d e o l o g y . One p o s s i b i l i t y i n d e e d . . . would be f o r a p a r t i a l f u s i o n o f d e s c e n t  and l o c a l i t y i d e o l o g y to d e v e l o p , w h i c h would b r i n g i d e o l o g y more c l o s e l y i n t o a l i g n m e n t w i t h t r a n s a c t i o n a l p a t t e r n s . ( S t r a t h e r n 1973: 26; emphasis mine) In e s s e n c e , the " p a r t i a l f u s i o n , o f d e s c e n t and l o c a l i t y i d e o l o g y " a p p e a r s to be what i s o c c u r r i n g among the O r o k a i v a i n t h e i r r a t i o n -a l i z a t i o n s o f hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . But i s t h i s " p a r t i a l f u s i o n " or i n t e r l o c k i n g an a t t e m p t upon the p a r t of the O r o k a i v a to b r i n g " i d e o l o g y " i n t o c l o s e r a l i g n m e n t w i t h t r a n s a c t i o n a l p a t t e r n s ? A l t h o u g h an i n t e r e s t i n g q u e s t i o n , i t n e v e r t h e l e s s r e f l e c t s t h e p r o b l e m o f d i s j u n c t i o n between i d e o l o g y and p r a c t i c e . Our c o n c e r n s h e r e , however, a r e w i t h the p r i n c i p l e s engaged i n the i n d i g e n o u s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h p l a n t emblems. Towards t h i s end, one f i n a l p r i n c i p l e needs to be d e l i n e a t e d , t h a t of . e x c h a n g e / c o m m e n s a l i t y . c) E x c h a n g e / C o m m e n s a l i t y O r o k a i v a n o t i o n s of exchange a r e c e r t a i n l y the b e s t docu-mented a s p e c t o f t h e i r c u l t u r e , due to Schwimmer's s t u d y , Exchange  i n the S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e of the O r o k a i v a ( 1 9 7 3 ) . A l t h o u g h i m p a i r e d by i t s c o n t i n u o u s l a p s e s i n t o the " l a n g u a g e of d e s c e n t " , Schwimmer's a n a l y s i s makes a s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n i n i t s f o c u s on exchange as a f u n d a m e n t a l p r i n c i p l e g o v e r n i n g O r o k a i v a s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s . R e c o g n i z i n g t h a t the O r o k a i v a do not form c o n c r e t e , e n d u r i n g a l i g n m e n t s Schwimmer f o c u s e d p r i m a r i l y on r e l a t i o n s h i p s o f t r a n s -- 6 3 -a c t i o n , r a t h e r t h a n on u n i t s , d e m o n s t r a t i n g how e l e m e n t s s u c h as l a n d , t a r o , c o c o n u t and a r e c a s e r v e t o m e d i a t e t h e s e r e l a t i o n s h i p s and make them i n t e l l i g i b l e . Schwimmer, h o w e v e r , n e v e r gave a t t e n t i o n t o t h e q u e s t i o n o f w h e t h e r e x c h a n g e as an o r g a n i z i n g p r i n c i p l e e n t e r s i n as a c o n s c i o u s r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n f o r t h e s h a r i n g o f a name, p l a n t emblem o r o t h e r w i s e . W i l l i a m s ' d a t a i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e r e i s a c o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n e x c h a n g e and c o m m e n s a l i t y on t h e one h a n d , and c o r p o r a t e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and a f f i l i a t i o n u n d e r one name on t h e o t h e r . . . . a l l t h e u n d e r l i n g s o f any 'big-man' w i l l be known t o o t h e r s u n d e r h i s name. I n t h e S a n g a r a d i a l e c t t h e r e i s a word t e k a h o k a , o f w h i c h I do n o t know t h e l i t e r a l m e a n i n g , b u t w h i c h a p p e a r s t o s t a n d f o r a ' f o l l o w i n g ' . When, a t a g a t h e r i n g o f t h e c l a n s f o r w a r , o r f o r some p e a c e f u l c e remony, t h e s e v e r a l p a r t i e s make t h e i r a p p e a r a n c e e a c h f o l l o w i n g i n s i n g l e f i l e b e h i n d i t s l e a d e r , a c r y w i l l go up, 'Here come t h e p e o p l e , t h e T e k a h o k a , o f Embuja, o f E h a r i , o f A n d a r i ! ' — w h o e v e r t h e big-man m i g h t b e. ( W i l l i a m s 1930: 103-4) 4 The O r o k a i v a use a number o f t e r m s t o r e f e r t o t h e i r 'big-men', b u t two o f them have p a r t i c u l a r r e l e v a n c e h e r e . These t e r m s a r e embo-.j a v o a r 1 and embo-penjavo . W i l l i a m s g l o s s e d embo-j a v o a r i as " t h e man who g i v e s t h e name". The s e c o n d name W i l l i a m s s u g g e s t s i s a c o n t r a c t i o n o f embo-peni-.j a v o , l i t e r a l l y "man-big-name": "The i m p l i c a t i o n i s t h a t t h e r e a l c h i e f i s t h e man who g i v e s h i s name to" h i s f o l l o w e r s , i . e . , t h e man by whose name t h e y a r e c o l l e c t i v e l y known" ( i b i d . ) . -64-Among the O r o k a i v a , as i s the c a s e among the m a j o r i t y of New G u i n e a s o c i e t i e s ( c f . B e r n d t & Lawrence 1971) l e a d e r s h i p i s b u i l t upon n e t w o r k s o f exchange/commensal r e l a t i o n s h i p s (Schwimmer 1967: 59; 1973: 133). I n the absence o f a genea-l o g i c a l c o n n e c t i o n between the big-man and h i s t e k a h o k a , W i l l i a m s ' d a t a i n d i c a t e s t h a t s o c i a l i d e n t i f i c a t i o n can be r a t i o n a l i z e d on the b a s i s of e x c h a n g e / c o m m e n s a l i t y . W i l l i a m s p r o v i d e s a n o t h e r example which makes e x p l i c i t the l i n k between h e r a t u i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and exchange/commen-s a l i t y . A c l a n may d i s c a r d an o l d h e r a t u and t a k e the synonymous p l a n t of a new l e a d e r . Thus a v e r y o l d man t e l l s me h i s h e r a t u was f o r m e r l y Tumena (a v a r i e t y of t a r o ) , but nowadays i t i s B a r i , b e c a u s e h i s son B a r i g i , an e x - s e r g e a n t of N a t i v e P o l i c e (made famous by C.A.W. Monckton) has t a k e n h i s p l a c e as l e a d e r o f the c l a n . ( i b i d . : 123) The d a t a p r e s e n t e d above i l l u s t r a t e s , I would argue,, a genre of n a t i v e r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n from w h i c h can be f o r m a l l y d e l i n e a t e d the p r i n c i p l e e x c h a n g e / c o m m e n s a l i t y . I have a r g u e d f o r the d e l i n e a t i o n of t h r e e p r i n c i p l e s — . l i n e a l i t y , t e r r i t o r i a l i t y , and e x c h a n g e / c o m m e n s a l i t y — from O r o k a i v a r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n s of p l a n t emblem i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . In the n e x t s e c t i o n , I argue t h a t the s h a r i n g of " s u b s t a n c e " -65-is governed by the operation o f these same three p r i n c i p l e s . IV. L i n e a l i t y , T e r r i t o r i a l i t y , and Exchange/Commensality II. Several analyses of New Guinea so c i a l organizations have focused on metaphors of relatedness (e.g. one blood, one semen) derived from native theories of procreation (cf. Barker 1979, McKellin 1980, Rohatynskyj 1978, Strathern 1972, Wagner 1967). The analysis presented in this section focuses primarily on Orokaiva b e l i e f s concerning the sharing of three kinds of "substance", ahihi, hamo, and lvo. Given the limitations of the data, however, a link cannot be properly established to any native theory o f procreation. Melpa food names"' provide a point o f entry. Arising out o f the sharing o f f o o d , the s h a r i n g o f that food's name as a reciprocal term of address among the Melpa suggested two questions to Strathern: F i r s t , what are the Melpa ideas about how food i s produced, i . e . what is the substance of food, and, second, how is i t that the sharing of food creates a new identity between persons which is similar to the identity of relationship expressed in the use of reciprocal kin terms? (Strathern 1977: 504) One. of the conclusions which Strathern arrives at, i s that the Melpa equate the sharing of food grown upon ancestral t e r r i t o r y with the sharing of "grease" (semen, milk) as a -66-s o u r c e of common s u b s t a n c e ; The metaphor of a p e r s o n as a p l a n t con-veys b o t h the sense of o r i g i n s and b e i n g r o o t e d i n a p a r t i c u l a r p l a c e , and the s e n s e of d r a w i n g s u s t e n a n c e from an [ a n c e s t r a l ] p l a c e . . . f o o d i s a n c e s t r a l l y p r o v i d e d . In e a t i n g i t one i s s i m p l y u s i n g e x t e r n a l s o u r c e s of s u s t e n a n c e which a r e a l s o i n t e r n a l l y p a s s e d down t h r o u g h the b o d i l y ' g r e a s e ' . . . of one's p a r e n t s . ( i b i d . : 506-7) S t r a t h e r n s t r e s s e s t h a t the Melpa b e l i e v e t h e i r a n c e s t r a l s p i r i t s p l a y an a c t i v e r o l e by w a t c h i n g o v e r the l a n d and e i t h e r s u p p o r t i n g or d i m i n i s h i n g i t s f e r t i l i t y ; f o o d i s the s u b s t a n c e of a n c e s t o r s ( i b i d . : 5 07). S a l i s b u r y o b s e r v e d a s i m i l a r complex of i d e a s among the S i a n e . E n q u i r i n g i n t o S i a n e i d e a s c o n c e r n i n g a n c e s t r a l k o r o v a or ' s p i r i t ' , he l e a r n t t h a t t h i s s p i r i t c o u l d come from the b l o o d or m i l k of the mother, the f a t h e r ' s semen, f o o d e a t e n d u r i n g c h i l d h o o d w h i c h c o n t a i n e d s p i r i t from the l a n d on w h i c h i t was grown, f r o m p o r k , from a name, or from p r o x i m i t y to o b j e c t s which s y m b o l i z e d k o r o v a ( S a l i s b u r y 1964: 170). An e x a m i n a t i o n of the O r o k a i v a d a t a r e v e a l s a number o f i n s i g h t f u l c o n v e r g e n c e s t h a t s u g g e s t a complex of i d e a s among the O r o k a i v a s i m i l a r to t h o s e mentioned f o r the Melpa and the S i a n e : the a s s o c i a t i o n o f a n c e s t r a l s p i r i t s w i t h garden l a n d , the t r a n s m i s s i o n of s p i r i t u a l s u b s t a n c e t h r o u g h the m e d i a t i o n of b o t h the l a n d , f o o d grown on the l a n d , p o r k , ; a s w e l l as t h r o u g h the s h a r i n g of f o o d . -67-a) Hamo and Ahihi Williams recorded that the Orokaiva believed the s p i r i t s of the dead (sovai) repaired to s p e c i f i c l o c a l i t i e s of sovai-ta-na: "...almost every one of the clan of the Aiga could name i t s own [sovai-1a-na]. They take the form of some well defined feature such as a h i l l , rock, or pool" (Williams 1930: 280). Schwimmer, on the other hand, records the Orokaiva b e l i e f that the s p i r i t s of the dead take up residence " . . . i n the garden he or she was cu l t i v a t i n g at the time of death" (Schwimmer 1973: 92). Furthermore, these ancestral s p i r i t s are believed to play a v i t a l role in the forming of children, what Schwimmer c a l l s the "transmigration of souls". In the analysis of Orokaiva b e l i e f s concerning ancestral s p i r i t s , Schwimmer recounts the following event, which began with the death of a man called Jarata: Jarata's s p i r i t stayed on the land he had been c u l t i v a t i n g at the time of death. Some six years l a t e r , Jarata's brother lent this land for a season to Gi l f o r d , the husband of a cl a s s i f a c t o r y s i s t e r . Gilford's wife became pregnant at the time. When the infant was born i t was named by the man who had lent the land, and was given the name of the dead brother Jarata. As far as I understand, the effect of this act of naming was to  attach the ahihi of Jarata (1) to the  infant, Jarata (2). ( i b i d . : 93; emphasis mine) 6 Schwimmer glosses ahihi as " s p i r i t " ( i b i d . ) . And, as the above example i l l u s t r a t e s , i t is the i n i t i a l association with -68-the ancestral land that forms the rationale for the infant sharing Jarata(l) 's ahihi. This sharing is also c l e a r l y indicated in an Orokaiva post-natal r i t u a l ( i b i d . : 92), discussed in d e t a i l in Chapter Three. In addition to ahihi,,a child also requires hamo, which Schwimmer glosses as "a combination of supernatural protec-tion and nutrient strength" ( i b i d . : 94), a substance necessary for forming the body. At b i r t h , this hamo, l i k e a hihi , i s obtained from an ancestor through the mediation of the land ( i b i d . ) . If we turn to Schwimmer's discussion of the mediative role of taro, we find the argument that taro has a l l the char-a c t e r i s t i c s of an object of mediation " . . . i n the sense in which the term was used in the discussion on land" ( i b i d . : 111). The Orokaiva believe that a taro has a s p i r i t l i f e so long as the top is s t i l l attached ( i b i d . : 114). When a man gives raw taro with the tops s t i l l on, the Orokaiva believe the "... s p i r i t substance transferred ... i s derived from his ancestors who are present in the land and in the tops of the taro ( i b i d . : 122). If this i s the case, then, as with land, the " s p i r i t substance" derived from taro should be that of ahihi, the same s p i r i t substance a. ch i l d derives from the land on which it.was born ( i b i d . : 92-3). In addition to ahihi, we also see recorded that taro " . . . i s symbolic of strength; i t is preferred to other staples because i t i s believed to build stronger men" ( i b i d . : 122). -69-Thus t h e g i v i n g and s h a r i n g o f t a r o a p p e a r s t o a l s o i n v o l v e t h e g i v i n g and s h a r i n g o f hamo, an e x t r a p o l a t i o n r e i n f o r c e d by t h e f a c t t h a t t h e t a r o g i v e n i s a l w a y s ' g a r d e n grown' ( i b i d . : 1 1 6 ) ; t h a t i s , grown on a n c e s t r a l l a n d , and hen c e imbued w i t h b o t h a h i h i and hamo. I t h e r e f o r e s u g g e s t t h a t t h e O r o k a i v a c o n c e p t u a l i z e r e l a t i o n s h i p s e s t a b l i s h e d t h r o u g h e x c h a n g e and c o m m e n s a l i t y i n t e r m s o f t h e s h a r i n g o f a h i h i and hamo. b) I v o T u r n i n g t o t h e s h a r i n g o ut and e a t i n g o f p o r k among t h e O r o k a i v a , a n o t h e r " s u b s t a n c e " i s o b s e r v e d . The d i f f e r e n c e b e t ween t a r o and p o r k i s t h a t t a r o i s r e g a r d e d as a s t a p l e f o o d t o keep men a l i v e , w h e r e a s p o r k i s r e g a r d e d as a f o o d o f s p e c i a l power e n a b l i n g men t o s u c c e e d i n t a s k s o f g r e a t d i f f i c u l t y . . . P o r k has a s p e c i a l power o r i v o , ( i b i d . : 144) Schwimmer f o c u s e s on t h e T o t o i m a myth a s ' t h e " c h a r t e r " f o r t h i s b e l i e f . I n t h i s m y th, t h e son o f T o t o i m a (a h a l f man/ h a l f p i g b e i n g ) c u t up h i s b o d y , and s h a r e d o u t t h e p i e c e s among men. T o t o i m a ' s body was e a t e n , c a u s i n g men t o m u l t i p l y and f i l l t h e l a n d . As a c o n s e q u e n c e o f t h i s a c t o f d i s t r i b u -t i o n , Schwimmer c o n c l u d e s t h a t " . . . i v o d i d n o t come f r o m t h e mere e a t i n g o f t h e meat, b u t f r o m t h e s h a r i n g o u t , f o l l o w e d by t h e e a t i n g " ( i b i d . ) . C o m m e n s a l i t y , t h e n , i s a l s o c o n c e p -t u a l i z e d i n t e r m s o f s h a r e d i v o . -70-Coconuts also mediate the sharing of ivo: ...the coconut is in general i d e n t i f i e d with ivo communicated by the dead to the l i v i n g . The coconuts of a dead leader are thought to contain his ivo in a form which is communicable, not to his kinsmen to whom these coconuts are taboo, but par-t i c u l a r l y to his affines ... the most c r u c i a l communication occurs in the large-scale ...mortuary feast.... ( i b i d . : 164-5) Thus coconuts mediate the sharing of ivo in much the same manner as taro in i t s creation of hamo t i e s . That i s , the sharing of ivo vis "a vis coconuts can be formally ordered according to both the principles of l i n e a l i t y and exchange/ commensality. The analysis of shared "substance" is summarized in figure (a) below. Principles of R e l a t e d n e s s Shared T e r r i t o r i a l i t y L i n e a l i t y Exchange/ Sub stances commensality Hamo LAND TARO TARO Ahihi LAND LAND TARO Ivo COCONUT PORK, COCONUT Figure (a) Thus far, the emic bases for Orokaiva s o c i a l i t y have been demonstrated to be Orokaiva notions of shared hamo, ahihi, and/or ivo. However, the link has yet to be made between -71-these substances, and hae or heratu. This l i n k cannot be s a t i s f a c t o r i l y e s t a b l i s h e d e m p i r i c a l l y from the e x i s t i n g data. Nevertheless, I contend that t h i s l i n k can be at l e a s t h y p o t h e t i c a l l y deduced from the data i n hand. Since the indigenous r e f e r e n c e s made to ancestry, land, and big-men i n the r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n of hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n can be f o r m a l l y ordered to y i e l d the three p r i n c i p l e s of l i n e a l i t y , t e r r i -t o r i a l i t y , and exchange/commensality, and since these p r i n c i p l e s can be seen to be e m i c a l l y grounded i n the indigenous notions of hamo, a h i h i , and i v o , then, by extension, we can hypothe-s i z e that the Orokaiva may indeed by c o n c e p t u a l i z i n g the sharing of hae i n terms of shared hamo, a h i h i , and i v o . I diagram t h i s argument i n f i g u r e (b) below. F i g u r e (b) -72-V. Towards an Ideology of Community The interlocked principles of l i n e a l i t y , t e r r i t o r i a l i t y , and exchange/commensality, together with Orokaiva notions of hamo, ahihi, and ivo, constitute, I would argue, the essential core of that Orokaiva idea complex which i s manipulated through the t a c t i c a l employment of hae in the creation of Orokaiva community. At the same time, i t is these ideational resources which demarcate the boundaries of hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . Now, establishing hae as a symbol of community required hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n to have moral implications. If the ration-a l i z a t i o n of hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n is conceptualized etnically in terms of shared "substance", then the sharing of "substance" should carry moral implications for the Orokaiva themselves. The following analysis demonstrates that the sharing of hamo, ahihi, and ivo in fact does carry with i t certain normative expectations. Turning f i r s t to the mediating role of land, what Is ob-served is that i t establishes the potential conjoining of man and s p i r i t , and man and man, in a relationship of moral o b l i -gation, one to another. As among the Melpa, Orokaiva s p i r i t s of the dead play an active role in looking out for the care of the land. An explanation given Schwimmer for the death of the child Jarata was: "...the mother did not look after the land properly". The assumption here i s that i f the garden where the child obtains what we c a l l his soul is well tended, then -73-the child's body w i l l also grow well.... (Schwimmer 1973: 93) This "intimate connection" between the individual and the s p i r i t of the garden "...endures to some extent throughout l i f e " ( i b i d . ) . Thus the " . . . c u l t i v a t o r works not only to 'survive' but also to repay that ancestor the. debt he has incurred by being given a body" ( i b i d . : 95).^ When the rights to tracts of land are transferred from one to another, an intimate bond is established between the two parties, which appears to be based on the recognition of shared s p i r i t "substance": In the case of land, we have seen that the owner strongly i d e n t i f i e s himself with the lineage s p i r i t s believed to be resident on the land. The land i s part of him, just as his ancestors are a part of him. By transferring the land to another person he causes that other person in turn to identify himself with the land. He i s thus magically imbued with the s p i r i t  of the donor and (ideally) compelled to  behave as though he owed the owner quasi-f i l i a l allegiance. ( i b i d . : 109-10; emphasis mine) Ideologically, i t is through the sharing of the s p i r i t u a l substance of the land (in this case, i t would seem, ahihi) that the two parties are conjoined together in a relationship of moral obligation. The role of hae in symbolizing this sort of moral re-lationship i s c l e a r l y seen in the following incident. In 1966-67 some families migrated from Garomi to the neighbouring -74-v i l l a g e of Sivepe. One of the men who received a taro garden started using the donor's plant  emb1em when working in that garden, thus emphasizing the closeness of the bond with the donor's family. [This action was re-garded] ...as entirely proper and highly sympathetic behavior, though t o t a l l y v o l -untary . ( i b i d . : 102-3; emphasis mine) We see in this last passage not only the moral aspect of the relationship as symbolized by the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with the donor's hae, but the t a c t i c a l aspect of this i d e n t i f i c a t i o n as well, underscored by reference to the voluntariness of the action. As for establishing that the sharing of "substance" in a relationship based on exchange/commensality results in the creation of moral obligations, we note that "objects", such as taro : ...have a special potency in attracting partners and that this potency is believed to be due to the presence of the donor's s p i r i t in the g i f t object and the trans-fer of that s p i r i t to the recipient through the mediation of the object. ( i b i d . : 122) Ideologically, exchange and commensality result, in the mutual sharing of one or the other's " s p i r i t " . It would appear that the Orokaiva think about relationships established in this manner in terms of shared "substance". Carrying the reasoning further, i f the mediation of taro and pork is i d e n t i -cal to that of land, then, i d e o l o g i c a l l y , the exchange/sharing -75-of these foods must (ideally) "compel" the parties involved to behave mo-rally one towards another (cf. i b i d . : 110). With respect to exchange/commensality, Williams provides an i n s i g h t f u l characterization of hae usage. Another man nurses some resentment against a nearby v i l l a g e . If he were bidden to a -feast there he would go, but with his  heratu in his armlet; and when the wooden dish of savory taro was placed before him, he would wave i t aside, or lay his heratu upon the food to show that he could not accept the h o s p i t a l i t y of those who had wronged him. Then the offender would be put to shame and punished, and be sorry for what he had done. (Williams 1930: 116; emphasis mine) In the above incident, a man makes his grudge public through the public display of his hae or heratu, thus communicating the difference between himself and his hosts, a difference underscored by his refusal to share in the eating of taro. A similar incident is recorded in connection with the sharing of pork: If a person has broken off soc i a l relations with a close r e l a t i v e in anger, by showing  this r e l a t i v e his plant emblem, then re-lations can be restored only i f the angry man is persuaded to 'throw his plant emblem away'. If he does this the person to whom the plant emblem has been shown w i l l s a c r i f i c e a_£i£-(Schwimmer 1973: 146; emphasis mine) We.see in these last two cases the moral implications of hae revealed through their employment as symbols expressing the absence of moral obligation. We see also their t a c t i c a l em-ployment, for in both instances the option was there, either -76-to affirm commensality -- and so community -- or negate i t . * A * The sharing of the substances hamo, ahihi, and ivo on the one hand, and plant emblems on the other, have both been shown to be formally structured in terms of the three interrelated principles of l i n e a l i t y , t e r r i t o r i a l i t y , and exchange/commensality. And since both Orokaiva plant emblems and hamo, ahihi, and ivo are integral to the indigenous r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n of s o c i a l i t y , I have proposed as a hypothesis the conclusion that native rationalizations of hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n are emically grounded in the Indigenous concepts of hamo, ahihi, and ivo. The resultant complex of ideas I have termed an 'ideology of community' for the Orokaiva. In Chapter Three I show how this ideational order can be applied to three events -- b i r t h , marriage, and death --in order to a r t i c u l a t e the points at which the ambiguities, options and constraints of Orokaiva social i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and a f f i l i a t i o n can occur within the contexts these three events create. F o o t n o t e s t o C h a p t e r Two P r i o r t o p a c i f i c a t i o n c o n t a c t b e t w e e n t h e W a s i d a O r o k i a v a and t h e M a n a g a l a s e a p p e a r s t o have been r e s t r i c t e d t o f i g h t i n g (Schwimmer 1973: 1 2 3 - 2 4 ) . 2 See a l s o K e e s i n g ( 1 9 6 8 , 1971) f o r a s i m i l a r e m p h a s i s on t h e c o n t e x t u a l d e f i n i t i o n o f s o c i a l i d e n t i t y and a f f i l i a t i o n See a l s o W i l l i a m s ( 1 9 3 0 : 105) f o r f u r t h e r e x a m p l e s o f t h i s g e n r e o f r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n . ^' W i l l i a m s a l s o r e c o r d e d t h e A i g a t e r m s embo-be, 'a p r o p e r man' ; and e m b o - p e n i , embo-pa.j i r a r i , e m b o - p a i t u k a i r i , and e m b o - s a i k a b a d a . These l a s t f o u r t e r m s W i l l i a m s s t a t e d as m e a n i n g "no more t h a n ' b i g o r i m p o r t a n t man'" ( 1 9 3 0 : 1 0 4 ) . Schwimmer f o u n d t h e W a s i d a u s i n g t h e t e r m k e a r i embo, 'a man o f k n o w l e d g e ' , o r embo dombo k e a r i , 'a man o f g r e a t know-l e d g e ' ( 1 9 6 7 : 5 3 - 4 ) . R i m o l d i r e c o r d s t h e t e r m k i t i . j i g a r i embo ' t h e man who moves f i r s t ' ( 1 9 6 6 : 3 0 ) . " Schwimmer (1974) d e s c r i b e s an i d e n t i c a l s y s t e m f o o d names i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h O r o k a i v a " f r i e n d s h i p " , b u t make a d i f f e r e n t p o i n t . ^ ' Schwimmer (1981) e q u a t e s a h i h i w i t h t h e A i g a t e r m a s i s i , d e s c r i b e d by W i l l i a m s (1928 , 1 9 3 0 ) . W i l l i a m s ' a c c o u n t i s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h Schwimmer's on t h i s p o i n t : b o t h t h e l i v i n g and t h e dead p o s s e s s a s i s i o r a h i h i ( s e e e s p . W i l l i a m s 1930: 2 6 0 - 8 4 ) . F o r e a r l i e r a c c o u n t s o f Papuan b e l i e f s c o n c e r n i n g " s o u l - s u b s t a n c e " see C h i n n e r y 1919 and R i v e r s 1920. ^ ' I n C h a p t e r T h r e e I q u a l i f y t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p be-tween an i n d i v i d u a l and a p a r t i c u l a r a n c e s t o r . The p o i n t t h a t r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n t h e l i v i n g and t h e dead i n v o l v e n o r m a t i v e e x p e c t a t i o n s i s m a i n t a i n e d . -78-Chapter Three Birth , Marriage, Death: Contexts  for Community -79-Chapter Three I. Introduction The vagueness and hesitancy with which Sogeri Koiari and Barai individuals responded to Williams' and Barker's attempts at e l i c i t i n g their group a f f i l i a t i o n s , revealed the t a c t i c a l implications of plant emblem i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . Addition-a l l y , Williams' and Barker's observations point to the indig-enous Importance of context as a variable affecting plant emblem i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . Taking the position that Orokaiva s o c i a l i t y i s emergent requires attention be given to events, and the contexts those events generate. The importance of "context" -- by which I mean so c i a l interaction informed by a scheme of symbolic class-i f i c a t i o n ' (cf . Huber 1980: 44; Wagner 1981: 37) — and the perspective that views s o c i a l groupings emerging out of those contexts,has been well established for Melanesia (cf. Scheffler 1965, Keesing 1968, de Coppett 1981). Keesing juxtaposes an emphasis on the contextual d e f i n i t i o n of s o c i a l identity to a notion of society "...composed of groups": We should concentrate instead on the m u l t i p l i c i t y of s o c i a l categories and roles to which our subjects assign one another, and on the way these are sorted out according to situation and groups are c r y s t a l l i z e d from so c i a l  categories. (Keesing 1968: 84; emphasis mine) - 8 0 -H a v i n g t a k e n t h e O r o k a i v a p l a n t emblem as t h e p r i n c i p l e s y m b o l o f O r o k a i v a s o c i a l i t y , a s y m b o l o f c o m m u n i t y , what f o l l o w s i s a c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e ways i n w h i c h t h e O r o k a i v a m i g h t i d e n t i f y t h e m s e l v e s w i t h hae w i t h i n a g i v e n c o n t e x t . E v e n t s , s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s , and t h e i r r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n s m i g h t t h u s be t h o u g h t o f as t h e " i n g r e d i e n t s " o f community ( B u r r i d g e 1979: 1 3 4 ) . W i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e O r o k a i v a , community becomes most c l e a r l y " v i s i b l e " -- i . e . as a phenomenal o r d e r i n g -- when e v e n t s r e q u i r e hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and i t s r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n t o become e x p l i c i t , and so ( t e m p o r a r i l y ) f i x e d w i t h r e s p e c t t o a f f i l i a t i o n . H a v i n g a c c o m p l i s h e d a d e l i n e a t i o n o f t h e c o m p l e x o f i d e a s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e i n d i g e n o u s r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n s o f hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , I now t u r n t o an a n a l y s i s o f t h r e e e v e n t s •-- b i r t h , m a r r i a g e , and d e a t h -- w h i c h g e n e r a t e c o n t e x t s f o r c ommunity. The r e l a t i o n a l t i e s o f s h a r e d " s u b s t a n c e " a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e e v e n t s o f b i r t h , m a r r i a g e , and d e a t h , a r e s o r t e d o u t f r o m t h e e t h n o g r a p h i c c o r p u s a c c o r d i n g t o t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f l i n e a l i t y , t e r r i t o r i a l i t y and e x c h a n g e / c o m m e n s a l i t y . The " l i n e s " o f r e l a t i o n s h i p ( c f . K e i l 1980) s u g g e s t e d by t h e s e p r i n c i p l e s a r e s u b s e q u e n t l y shown t o c r o s s - c u t o r o v e r l a p e a c h o t h e r , t h u s r e v e a l i n g t h e p o i n t s a t w h i c h a m b i g u i t i e s o f i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and a f f i l i a t i o n m i g h t a r i s e f o r t h e O r o k a i v a t h e m s e l v e s . - 8 1 -The e v e n t s o f b i r t h , m a r r i a g e , and d e a t h , i n r e q u i r i n g hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n t o become v i s i b l e , t e m p o r a r i l y " c l o s e " a f f i l i a t i v e a m b i g u i t i e s w h i l e a t t h e same t i m e p r o v i d i n g f o r s o c i a l r e a l i g n m e n t s t h r o u g h t h e m a n i p u l a t i o n o f a f f i l i a t i v e o p t i o n s . I m p o r t a n t l y , b i r t h , m a r r i a g e , and d e a t h a l s o s e r v e t o c r e a t e new i d e o l o g i c a l b a s e s f o r s u b s e q u e n t s o c i a l a l i g n -ments and r e a l i g n m e n t s . * * * Among t h e O r o k a i v a , t h e l i v i n g and t h e dead do n o t l i v e t o t a l l y s e p a r a t e l i v e s ; n o r do t h e dead l i v e i n a t o t a l l y d i s t i n c t w o r l d o f t h e i r own. As has a l r e a d y been m e n t i o n e d , s o v a i - t a - n a a r e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h s p e c i f i c g e o g r a p h i c a l l o c a t i o n s and f e a t u r e s ; t h e O r o k a i v a f r e q u e n t l y have e n c o u n t e r s w i t h s o v a i ( W i l l i a m s 1930: 2 6 7 - 8 7 ) ; t h e a n c e s t r a l s p i r i t o r " s u b -s t a n c e " ( a s i s i , o r a h i h i ) p l a y s an e s s e n t i a l r o l e i n t h e g r o w t h and l i f e o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l (Schwimmer 1973: 9 2 - 5 ) . . M c K e l l i n makes a s i m i l a r o b s e r v a t i o n f o r t h e M a n a g a l a s e . Once a p e r s o n d i e s he may h o t be d i r e c t l y c o n s i d e r e d p a r t o f a s o c i a l g r o u p b u t he r e m a i n s a member o f t h e G e m e i n s c h a f t , t h e commensal community i n w h i c h he p r e v i o u s l y l i v e d and w o r k e d . Though he t a k e s up a new r e s i d e n c e a f t e r d e a t h , he s t i l l p a r t i c i p a t e s i n t h e o n g o i n g r e l a t i o n s o f t h e members o f h i s community. ( M c K e l l i n op. c i t . : 155) To c o n s i d e r t h e c o n t e x t s f o r community among t h e Oro-k a i v a t h e r e f o r e r e q u i r e s a p e r s p e c t i v e t h a t i n c o r p o r a t e s two -82-"planes" of s o c i a l i t y : between the l i v i n g ; between the l i v i n g and the dead. The emergence of s o c i a l i t y among the l i v i n g thus nec-e s s a r i l y involves a consideration of the relationship between the l i v i n g and the dead (cf. de Coppett 1981). This d i v i s i o n of s o c i a l i t y into two planes of relationship w i l l be seen as relevant primarily in relation to " b i r t h " and "death". Hae, inasmuch as they symbolize the sharing of "substance" between the l i v i n g and the dead, highlight the points of intersection between these planes. II . Birth and Community A c h i l d . . . cannot be viewed as an independ-ent variable in the formation of his kinship attitudes; he does not simply move through the world cathecting to relatives on his own, but i s manipulated here, as in other parts of the world. (Wagner 1967: 100) a) Children and Ancestors Among the Orokaiva, the conception and bi r t h of a chi l d i n i t i a t e s a series of actions or events — some r i t u a l , others not -- which i n i t i a t e the so c i a l and physical equipping of the individual for entry into community p a r t i c i p a t i o n . These events are here analyzed in terms of the l i n e a l , ter-r i t o r i a l , and exchange/commensal components that can be de-lineated from them. Taken together, these components delimit - 8 3 -t h e c o n t e x t o f b i r t h , r e v e a l i n g t h e v a r i o u s l i n e s o f r e -l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e l i v i n g , and be t w e e n t h e l i v i n g and th e d e a d , w i t h i n w h i c h t h e newborn i s s i t u a t e d . A f t e r b i r t h , t h e f i r s t s o c i a l a l i g n m e n t s t o t a k e p l a c e a r e a t once l i n e a l and t e r r i t o r i a l , e s t a b l i s h e d t h r o u g h t h e r i t u a l i n i t i a t i o n o f a r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e c h i l d and some d e c e a s e d . T r a n s m i g r a t i o n i s e f f e c t e d by a r i t u a l p e r -f o r m e d s h o r t l y a f t e r t h e b i r t h o f an i n f a n t . The p a r e n t s t a k e t h e c h i l d t o t h e l a n d where t h e s p i r i t o f t h e d e c e a s e d i s b e l i e v e d t o r e s i d e . They s e e k t h e s p i r i t by p l a c i n g l e a v e s o f a f r a g r a n t p l a n t c a l l e d mo i n a c r e e k w h i c h r u n s t h r o u g h t h e l a n d . When th e s p i r i t i s t h o u g h t t o have e n t e r e d t h e l e a v e s t h e p a r e n t s a d d r e s s i t t h u s : 'You a r e dead now. We s h a l l l o o k a f t e r t h e l a n d and we s h a l l l o o k a f t e r t h e baby so i t w i l l become b i g and s t r o n g . Then t h i s c h i l d w i l l l o o k a f t e r t h e l a n d ' . The w i f e , i n p r e p a r a -t i o n f o r t h i s r i t e , has b r o u g h t t h e baby t o t h e g a r d e n i n a s t r i n g b a g , and has a l s o b r o u g h t a s t i c k . When she a r r i v e s i n t h e g a r d e n , she p l a c e s t h e s t i c k i n t h e g r o u n d and hangs t h e baby i n i t s s t r i n g bag fr o m t h e s t i c k . A f t e r t h e r i t u a l by t h e w a t e r , she d r o p s some o f t h e l e a v e s by t h e s t i c k , t h e n t a k e s t h e b a b y , t h e bag and t h e r e s t o f t h e l e a v e s and r e t u r n s home w i t h h e r h u s -b a n d . The cu s t o m i s f o r t h e h u s b a n d t o say a t n i g h t : ' I h e a r t h e baby c r y i n g ' . He i s e x p e c t e d t o go b a c k t o t h e g a r d e n and t a l k t o t h e baby t h a t i s b e l i e v e d t o be i n t h e s t i c k , t e l l i n g i t t h a t t h e p a r e n t s w i l l now l o o k a f t e r i t and t h e r e i s no need t o c r y . He s h o u l d t h e n t a k e t h e s t i c k , w i t h t h e 'baby' i n s i d e i t , t o h i s home. (Schwimmer 1973: 92) I n C h a p t e r Two i t was n o t e d t h a t t h e hamo o f t h e d e c e a s e d i s b e l i e v e d t o p a s s t o t h e c h i l d t h r o u g h t h e m e d i -a t i o n s o f t h e l a n d (and t h e d i g g i n g s t i c k u t i l i z e d i n t h e r i t u a l -84-i l l u s t r a t e d above). Additionally, the ahihi or a s i s i of the deceased is acquired by the child through the mediations of the land (and some fragrant leaves called mo) I have been careful to say "some deceased" because i t is not at a l l clear from the above r i t u a l as described that a genealogical t i e between child and deceased is a prerequisite to formally appropriating the deceased ' s hamo and ah i h i . kl-though the data i s scanty, the implication is that, rather than requiring a genealogical t i e , the r i t u a l in question provides for future t e r r i t o r i a l claims on the basis of a created l i n e a l t i e of shared ahihi and/or hamo between the child and the deceased associated with that t e r r i t o r y . Schwimmer argues that the r i t u a l in question establishes a relationship based on exchange between the l i v i n g and the dead. The land is i d e n t i f i e d with the ancestor who gave the infant i t s body. The c u l -tivator works not only to 'survive' but also to repay that ancestor the debt he has incurred by being given a body. ( i b i d . : 95; emphasis mine) But a garden plot is quickly exhausted; eighteen months is the average season of use, followed by four to f i f t e e n years of fallow (Rimoldi 1966: 15-18). Schwimmer himself notes that ... i t may be r i g h t l y argued that every couple cu l t i v a t e s , at one time or another, a large, number of plots, and that only some of these plots are linked to their c ultivators through post-natal r i t e s performed in respect -85-of themselves.or their children. (Schwimmer 1973: 94) Schwimmer counters this objection by arguing that every garden i s associated with sovai to whom someone is always responsible. Ultimate r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to ancestral sovai rests with the 'father of the ground', or enda mama, that individual who has the strongest claim to the land ( i b i d . ) . If a transfer of use is arranged, the . person Cs.) to whom the use-right i s transferred i s responsible to the donor for the care of the sovai, which involves making food offerings ( i b i d . ; cf. also Williams 1930: 284). Recall, though, the argument that the individual has a re s p o n s i b i l i t y to that pa r t i c u l a r ancestral sovai.to whom he is"l i n k e d by ties of shared hamo and ahihi. Schwimmer's arguments concerning the nature of the re-lationship between the l i v i n g and. ancestral sovai thus f a l l short of cle a r l y distinguishing the 'service' owed that de-ceased with whom one is i n i t i a l l y r i t u a l l y associated, from the 'service' done to a whole host of sovai in the course of one 's l i f e . The interpretation that the 'service' done to sovai constitutes an exchange between the l i v i n g and the dead, v e i l s further implications of the data. There is an apparent i n d i -genous 'indifference' concerning which sovai food offerings are made to. This 'indifference' suggests that what is perhaps --86-more important to the Orokaiva is the building up of poten-t i a l l y r e a lizable claims to land (on behalf of one's children through post-natal r i t e s , and on behalf of oneself through 'service' to sovai) which can be indigenously rationalized in terms of a'commensally based substance t i e , r i t u a l l y esta-blished with the sovai of that land. Involved here would be some knowledge of the names of previous users, whose sovai now inhabited that area. Ritual service to the sovai associ-ated with a t e r r i t o r y can thus be seen as providing the ideo-l o g i c a l underpinnings for future action, e.g. t e r r i t o r i a l cla ims. Having argued for a relationship between the building up of potential claims to land and r i t u a l service to the dead from- ego's perspective, we must also consider the potential claims on ego himself... If ties to land, on the basis of a commensal relationship between ego and sovai provide for ego's entry into the arena of competitive production, i t is also the case that such as ** s o c i a t i o n s e s t a b l i s h potential claims upon ego when s t i l l a c h i l d . In the "Jarata" case discussed in Chapter Two, ego (Jarata (2)) was named by his c l a s s i f i c a t o r y mother's brother, the brother . of the deceased Jarata(l) whose sovai resided upon the land cultivated by Jarata (2)'s parents at the time of ego's b i r t h . Schwimmer (1973) stated that the naming of Jarata (2) by his c l a s s i f i c a t o r y mother's brother attached the ahihi of -87-Jarata(l)'s sovai to the infant Jarata(2). But the actual service to the sovai of Jarata(l) must have f a l l e n to Jarata(2)'s father. Thus, Jarata's brother, in lending his plot to his c l a s s i f i c a t o r y brother-in-law, sim-ultaneously passed on the s p i r i t of his dead brother, resident on that plot. ( i b i d . : 172) As for the c h i l d , If Jarata(2), a member of the Jegese clan, had survived, he would have been closely i d e n t i f i e d with the lineage of Seho of which Jarata(l) was a member. (ibid.) The Jarata case, I would argue, reveals the establishment of competing claims upon Jarata(2) by both paternal and maternal kinsmen, and i l l u s t r a t e s the p o l i t i c a l implications that sharing ahihi and hamo with an ancestor has. I say "competing claims", for Jarata(2)'s " i d e n t i f i c a t i o n " with the Seho "lineage" of which Jarata(l) was a member should hot be read as constituting automatic recruitment into a group. Rather, the ti e of l i n e a l i t y -- shared ahihi and hamo with . Jarata(l) — sets up an a f f i l i a t i v e option among others which may or may not be realized in the course of ego's l i f e . b)- The Tato Relationship A closer examination of Orokaiva customs of naming is 2 warranted. When i t appears a child w i l l l i v e , "...some person - 8 8 -i s a s k e d t o s t a n d g o d f a t h e r o r g odmother t o t h e c h i l d , who i s t o t a k e h i s o r h e r name" ( W i l l i a m s 1930: 9 6 ) . The r e c i -p r o c a l t e r m t h a t d e s i g n a t e s t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p i s " t a t o " . The name g i v e n , h o w e v e r , may be t h a t o f someone a l r e a d y dead ( i b i d . ) ; t h e J a r a t a e x a m p l e i s a c a s e i n p o i n t . T a t o do n o t s t a n d i n any s p e c i f i c r e l a t i o n s h i p t o e a c h o t h e r p r i o r t o e n t e r i n g t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p . W i l l i a m s n o t e d t h a t , o f t h e t a t o r e l a t i o n s h i p s he r e c o r d e d , t h e e l d e r 3 s t o o d t o t h e y o u n g e r as e i t h e r a h i j e ( f a t h e r ' s f a t h e r , m o t h e r f a t h e r ) , mama ( f a t h e r ' s b r o t h e r ) , nobo ( i n g e n e r a l , any m a t e r n a l m a l e o f m o t h e r ' s g e n e r a t i o n ) and simbo ( c r o s s - c o u s i n s r e a l o r c l a s s i f i c a t o r y ) . The t a t o r e l a t i o n s h i p has a s s o c i a t e d w i t h i t a number o f m u t u a l o b l i g a t i o n s . A t t h e c h i l d ' s b i r t h h i s t a t o b r i n g s f i r e w o o d f o r t h e c o m f o r t o f m o t h e r and c h i l d . . . C o n t i n u a l p r e s e n t s o f f o o d a r e g i v e n , and t h e e l d e r t a t o w i l l t a k e an i n t e r e s t i n and make a p e t o f t h e y o u n g e r . I t a p p e a r s t h a t i t i s h i s s p e c i a l d u t y t o make t h e p e r f o r a t i o n s i n t h e c h i l d ' s e a r s and n o s e . R e t u r n p r e s e n t s o f f o o d a r e made by t h e c h i l d ' s f a t h e r ; and i t w i l l s t a y f r o m t i m e t o t i m e i n t h e e l d e r t a t o ' s h ouse and g i v e him some a s s i s t a n c e i n h i s g a r d e n . ( i b i d . : 96-7) I n e s s e n c e , t h e o b l i g a t i o n s d e s c r i b e d above r e s e m b l e t h o s e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e a v u n c u l a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p f o u n d t h r o u g h o u t Papua New G u i n e a , and b e a r c o m p a r i s o n w i t h a s i m i l a r r e l a t i o n s h i p f o u n d among t h e Omie. -89-Among the neighbouring Omie, there exists a r e l a t i o n -ship p a r a l l e l i n g the tato, the ajume. Men generally have as their ajume a maternal r e l a t i v e , though instances where the aj ume was a paternal kinsmen were observed (Rohatynskyj op. c i t . : 136-37). Like the prestations of food surrounding the tato relationship, the aj ume brings fresh meat, f r u i t , and vegetables to the mother while she is s t i l l pregnant. This food is seen as " . . . d i r e c t l y contributing to the development of the child within her" ( i b i d . : 139). The various services rendered are looked upon as I n i t i a t i n g the elder aj ume's claim upon the c h i l d , in competition with the claims of the father ( i b i d . ) . Like the elder tato too, the elder aj ume names the 4 c h i l d at about one year of l i f e . During the Omie naming ceremony, certain "red" foods (bore) are prepared and given by the child's paternal group to the elder a.j ume and other maternal kin ( i b i d . : 147). Symbolic of male v i t a l i t y and "extreme s p i r i t u a l power", bore is also used in offerings to ancestral s p i r i t s (aru'ahe) ( i b i d . : 166). Bore then, i s by d e f i n i t i o n a food pre-pared for the aru'ahe. It must be assumed that the consumption of this dish by l i v i n g men, the hire [mother's brother] aj ume of the boy being named, is on behalf of the s p i r i t s that they are in association with i . e . , the boy's maternal ancestral s p i r i t s . The p r o p i t i a t i o n of the maternal s p i r i t s of the young boy by his father, and the accept-ance of the offering by the hire/aj ume on behalf of these s p i r i t s , signals an agree-- 9 0 -ment to maintain a harmonious re-lationship between the father, his son and his wife's people both l i v i n g and dead . ( i b i d . : 166-67) The Orokaiva idea that foods such as taro, coconut and pork are imbued with ancestral substances (ahihi, hamo, ivo) suggests that the exchanges of food between paternal and maternal kinsmen in the context of the tato relationship esta-blishes a set of ties between the l i v i n g and the dead, which is similar to the Omie case. The Jarata case, however, suggests that the name i t s e l f , that i s , the bestowal of a name by the senior tato on the c h i l d , i d e n t i f i e s the l a t t e r with the " s p i r i t " of the present, or previous, name-holder.^ What i s of ultimate concern here are the ways in which the sharing of hae between tato can be r a t i o n a l i z e d . The data brought forward implies that the sharing of "substance" between the elder and the younger tato can be rationalized either on the basis of exchange/commensality, or on the basis of l i n e a l i t y . These two principles are here intertwined. For i f the surrounding prestations provide for a r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n of hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n based upon exchange/commensality, the sharing of "substance", in conjunction with a shared name, could provide the basis for r a t i o n a l i z i n g hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n in.terms of l i n e a l i t y . ^ Recently, Schwimmer has shown that hae passed down from parents to children have a t e r r i t o r i a l a s s o c i a t i o n . 7 In 4 -91-connection with t e r r i t o r i a l t i e s , the Jarata case raises a relevant question: Is i t always necessary for the younger tato to have an existing, or prior, association, through the parents, with a ' t e r r i t o r y to which the elder tato has ties? Such an association in connection with the tato relationship is not recorded by Williams. However, the data does Imply the establishment of a tie between the younger tato and the lands of the elder. Williams recorded that the younger tato spends time with the elder tato, helping in his gardens (Williams 1930: 97). The younger tato would l i k e l y thus become familiar with the elder tato's t e r r i t o r i a l claims, and perhaps become acquainted with the knowledge upon which those claims were based. A young man "customarily" spends time with his maternal kin, and while doing so would become acquainted with and use their hae or heratu ( i b i d . : 114). The tato relationship thus i n i t i a t e s a series of ties to the child in competition with the claims of f i l i a t i o n . In theory, such a competitive claim could arise whether or not the elder tato stood as a paternal or a maternal kinsmen to 8 the younger. In short, as a boy matures and begins to hunt and f i s h and make his own gardens, rights to hae and claims to t e r r i t o r -i a l l y based resources on the basis of hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i l l vary according to whether or not his tato is a paternal or a -92-maternal kinsmen, and whether or not his family of orient-ation is residing u x o r i l o c a l l y or v i r i l o c a l l y . c) L i n e a l i t y , T e r r i t o r i a l i t y , and Exchange/Commensality Concerning the ideological bases for hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s , the foregoing discussion has Indicated the ways in which the created r e l a t i o n a l ties of "substance" might be rationalized. Taking the analyses of Orokaiva post-natal r i t u a l s and the tato relationship together, a complex configuration of l i n e a l , t e r r i t o r i a l , and exchange/commensal " l i n e s " of relationship emerges. The relationship between elder and younger tato revealed an intertwining of l i n e a l and exchange/ commensal p r i n c i p l e s : The sharing of hae between tato could be rationalized in terms of either p r i n c i p l e . Additionally, post-natal r i t u a l , ongoing food offerings to sovai, and the prestations surrounding the tato r e l a t i o n -ship, can be seen to establish commensal ties with ancestors and predecessors who have a t e r r i t o r i a l association. Thus the two planes of s o c i a l i t y intersect: Relation-al ties among the l i v i n g intersect those relationships that the l i v i n g have with the dead. As a consequence, through ties of exchange and commensality "...with ancestors and predecessors who are also consociates..." (McKellin op. c i t . : 232), not only can ties of t e r r i t o r i a l i t y become ties of l i n -- 9 3 -e a l i t y ; i t can be e q u a l l y s e e n t h a t l i n e a l t i e s c a n become t e r r i t o r i a l t i e s . * * * The s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n t h a t emerges as a c o n s e q u e n c e o f b i r t h c a n t h u s be s e e n t o d e v e l o p a number o f o f t e n c o m p e t i n g c l a i m s upon a b o y - c h i l d . C o n v e r s e l y , as a young man b e g i n s t o c u l t i v a t e , e x c h a n g e , and c o n s i d e r m a r r i a g e , t h e r e l a t i o n a l t i e s o f " s u b s t a n c e " t h a t have " a c c u m u l a t e d " , t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e i r o p t a t i v e r a t i o n a l i z a t o n s , w i l l p r o v i d e t h e i d e o l o g i c a l u n d e r p i n n i n g s f o r hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s i n s u b -s e q u e n t c o n t e x t s . I I I . M a r r i a g e and Community a) The P r o b l e m w i t h ' R u l e s ' N e i t h e r Schwimmer (1973) n o r W i l l i a m s (1930) a r e e n -t i r e l y s u c c e s s f u l i n b r i n g i n g o r d e r t o O r o k a i v a m a r r i a g e ' r u l e s ' and f o r m s . T h a t i s t o s a y , t h e i r a t t e m p t s a t f i t t i n g t h e d a t a t o g e t h e r I n t o a c o h e r e n t p i c t u r e have met w i t h l i m i t e d s u c c e s s . Compounding t h e s e p r o b l e m s i n c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n a r e c e r t a i n m i s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s o f W i l l i a m s ' d a t a by Schwimmer; as ,an e n t r y i n t o O r o k a i v a m a r r i a g e I t o u c h t h i s i s s u e f i r s t . -94-According to Schwimmer, Williams ...quotes three c o n f l i c t i n g sets of rules, given to him by informants...[1] According to some informants the clan was an exogamous group. [2] According to others, marriage within the clan was permissible, but marriage was prohibited between persons sharing a plant emblem. [3] A third rule quoted to Williams was that marriage was prohibited between du_ ( i . e . real or c l a s s i f i c a t o r y siblings) but permitted and common between cross-cousins. (Schwimmer 1973: 197) Schwimmer's paraphrase of the f i r s t 'rule', that of clan exogamy, i s essentially correct. According to Williams: "Some witnesses have said i t is not permissible for a man to marry a woman of his own clan" (Williams 1930: 132). Schwimmer's paraphrase of the second 'rule', however, constitutes an erroneous picture of Williams' data. F i r s t of a l l , Williams' informants did not combine statements con-cerning clan endogamy with the prohibition against marriage between those sharing a plant emblem. This prohibition i s in fact associated with the statements concerning clan exogamy; i t constitutes one of two native explanations given for why a man should not marry a woman of the same clan: ...a witness said that i f a man and wife of the same clan happened to quarrel they would both find themselves c a l l i n g the name of the same heratu...; and the neigh-bours overhearing would shake their heads or turn up their noses at the idea of marriage between two of the same clan. (ibid.) As for the 'rule' of endogamy, this was applied to both clan and v i l l a g e by some informants, without any reference to -95-heratu: It has been stated . ... that in a v i l l a g e where there happens to be a number of attractive g i r l s i t i s a wise thing for the young men of that v i l l a g e to marry them and keep them at home. And this precept was made"applicable to the clan i t s e l f by some informants.... (ibid.) Schwimmer's paraphrase of the third 'rule' i s s i m i l a r l y problematic. Although Williams' informants did express "... repugnance at the suggestion of marriage with a d_u or ' s i s t e r ' ..." ( i b i d ) , they did not couple this sentiment with any state-ments concerning marriage between "cross-cousins". Now "cross-cousin" i s acknowledged by Schwimmer (1973: 199) as a summation of the gloss Williams gives for the term simbo: " c h i l d of father's s i s t e r ; children of a l l tata [father' s i s t e r ; females of father's clan and generation; maternal uncle wife]; children of the mother's brother; children of a l l nobo [mother's brother; males of mother's clan and generation], i.e. cross-cousins (Williams 1930: 109). Schwimmer, however, further errs in stating: Williams- notes that simbo marriages were extremely common in the commun-i t i e s he studied (1930: 132), but does not seem to have been told of the pre-f e r e n t i a l rule [of b i l a t e r a l cross-cousin marriage] (Schwimmer 1973: 199) What in fact Williams did say i s th i s : Marriage is common between f i r s t cousins, though in no recorded instance did these belong to one and the same clan. .We may probably assume that marriage of f i r s t -96-c o u s i n s w i t h i n the c l a n i s f o r -b i d d e n , a l t h o u g h the g e n e r a l r u l e of c l a n exogamy i s o f t e n d i s r e g a r d e d . ( W i l l i a m s 1930: 132) Nowhere i n the whole c h a p t e r on m a r r i a g e ( C h a p t e r IX of O r o k a i v a S o c i e t y ) does W i l l i a m s e v e r m e n t i o n "simbo m a r r i a g e s " or even " c r o s s - c o u s i n s " . And a l t h o u g h one might i n f e r t h a t W i l l i a m s meant c r o s s - c o u s i n s b e c a u s e he r e c o r d s p a r a l l e l c o u s i n s as h a v i n g s i b l i n g t e r m i n o l o g y a p p l i e d to them ( i b i d . : 109-11)., any p o s i t i v e a s s e r t i o n t h a t he d i d i s u n s u b s t a n t -i a t e d c o n j e c t u r e . b) The P r o b l e m o f ' M a r i t a l E l i g i b i l i t y ' B e f o r e c o n s i d e r i n g W i l l i a m s ' d a t a a f r e s h , one f u r t h e r p r o b l e m ( o r , r a t h e r , s e t o f p r o b l e m s ) needs to be c o n s i d e r e d , the p r o b l e m of m a r i t a l e l i g i b i l i t y . Schwimmer, t a k i n g W i l l i a m s as h i s d e p a r t u r e p o i n t , d e v e l o p s f u r t h e r the meaning of "simbo". The p r i m a r y meaning [ o f simbo] I s n o t c r o s s - c o u s i n . . . the two terms do n o t e n t i r e l y s h a r e the same f i e l d of r e -f e r e n c e . Simbo i s an arrangement o f m a r r i a g e . . A simbo may be e s t a b l i s h e d when a boy's p a r e n t s b r i n g p a r t of a b r i d e w e a l t h to the p a r e n t s of the g i r l t h e y want t h e i r son to m a r r y . . . . I n a s e c o n d a r y s e n s e , the word simbo a l s o r e f e r s to t h a t c a t e g o r y o f c o n s a n g u i n e s w i t h which b e t r o t h a l s of the k i n d j u s t d e s c r i b e d can be p r o p e r l y made. (Schwimmer 1973: 199) -97-Th i s "category of consanguines" mentioned above is comprised of "...either cross-cousins in the s t r i c t sense, or consan-guines with whom kinship can be traced neither wholly in the p a t r i l i n e , nor wholly in the matriline" ( i b i d . ) . But Schwimmer defines a "consanguine" as traced by the Orokaiva "...through a chain of linkages based on f i l i a t i o n , o_r a shared clan name, ojr common bir t h in a distant v i l l a g e " ( i b i d . : 203; emphasis mine). One is l e f t to wonder what is being traced by the Orokaiva themselves in their application of "simbo" and ' consanguine' ('kinsman'?). i In another place, Schwimmer states: "The best trans-l a t i o n of simbo would probably be: potential preferential marriage partner" ( i b i d . : 1974: 65). And, from yet another angle; Schwimmer states: "In general ...a simbo is someone with whom one does not share a hae... " ( i b i d . 1973':: 206).' And an a r t i c l e on "friendship", Schwimmer argues that a simbo relationship can be established "...between non-kin who are engaged in an appropriate enterprise" ( i b i d . 1974: 66). To sum up Schwimmer's data, s imbo can apparently mean: (a) an arrangement of marriage. (b) potential, preferential marriage partner. (c) a category of consanguines (including cross-cousins) with whom betrothals can be properly made. (d) someone with whom one does not share a common hae. (e) a non-kin "f r i e n d " . -98-In meanings (a) , ,(b) , and (c) the rel a t i v e sex between ego and a l t e r i s implied to be opposite, but in meanings (d) and (e) the re l a t i v e sex between ego and alter i s l e f t unmarked, i.e. ego and alt e r can either be two men, a man and a woman, or two women (cf. i b i d . 1974). Notwithstanding the plethora of meaning Schwimmer at-tributes to "simbo", he yet attempts to r e s t r i c t i t s mean-ing in d i s t i l l i n g a marriage 'rule' on the basis of i t s use. ...there is an e x p l i c i t rule of preferen-t i a l b i l a t e r a l cross-cousin marriage. A l l informants were agreed that the most proper marriage partner is one who is addressed as simbo before marriage. ... q (i b i d . 1973: 199) Taking the foregoing discussion of s imbo together with the evidence of Schwimmer's misrepresentation of Williams' data^ i t would appear that the presence of an " e x p l i c i t rule of b i l a t e r a l cross-cousin marriage" should be viewed with some d oub t. Generalizing from Orokaiva marriage 'rules' as ana-lysed, the delimitation ofa"marriageable" category opposed to a "non-marriageable" category appears to be of limited u t i l i t y in analysing Orokaiva marriage; the Orokaiva them-selves do not appear to set clear boundaries in rel a t i o n to marital e l i g i b i l i t y and i n e l i g i b i l i t y . -99-c) Orokaiva Marriage and Hae Id e n t i f i c a t i o n Given the present study's emphasis on the Orokaiva plant emblem, the following question suggests i t s e l f : To what extent are Orokaiva marriages a r e f l e c t i o n of the i n -digenous manipulation of multiple hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s in accord-ance with the ordering principles of l i n e a l i t y , t e r r i t o r -i a l i t y , and exchange/commensality? In addition to his comments concerning simbo, Schwimmer makes some statements regarding hae in connection with marriage Those who were related to the same dis-t i n c t i v e hae would cooperate in marriage and mortuary payments and maintain a s t r i c t exogamy rule. ( i b i d . : 196; cf. also 1974: 59) ...the hae occurs prominently in Orokaiva marriage rules with regard to incest and exogamy. (i b i d . 1973: 197) A rule that was expressed to me often and fo r c i b l y was that people should not marry i f they share a paternal or maternal hae .... If two people are i d e n t i f i e d with a plant in this way they are s i b l i n g s . ( i b i d . : 2 06) These passages indicate that (a) hae are employed to d i f f e r -entiate the 'marriageable' from the 'non-marriageable' and (b) hae groups emerge in the context of marriage as wife-givers in opposition to wife-takers for the purposes of exchange. There are other issues here, e.g. Orokaiva notions of " s i b l i n g s h i p " 1 ^ , but for now I would l i k e to focus on the oppositions wife-giver/wife-taker and marriageable/ non--100-marriageable. A return to Williams' data concerning clan exogamy is warranted. Below are the two native explanations given for why intra-clan marriage should be avoided. (a) If a g i r l married a man of her own clan, where, i t was asked, would the pay or brideprice come from? (b) ...a witness said that i f a man and wife of the same clan happened to quarrel they would both find them-selves c a l l i n g the name of the same heratu.... (Williams op. c i t . : 131) If those sharing a hae co-operate to make bridewealth pay-ments, as Schwimmer suggests they do, then we can see how both ra t i o n a l i z a t i o n s might be based on the same assumption, i. e . g i r l and man, man and wife, would share a common plant emblem. Nevertheless, Williams found clan endogamy to be quite prevalent. Two such marriages, recorded by Williams, are presented below. Tangoro -101-W i l l i a m s d i s c o v e r e d a s e r i e s o f c l a s s i f i c a t o r y ' t r a n s -f o r m a t i o n s ' a c c o m p a n y i n g t h e above two m a r r i a g e s : T a n g o r o c a l l e d K i r i g a mama [ F , FB, men o f F's c l a n and g e n e r a t i o n ] u n t i l t h e l a t t e r m a r r i e d Tangoro's s i s t e r , when he c a l l e d him n a b o r i [ s i s t e r ' s h u s b a n d ; an a f f i n a l t e r m ] . Now T a n g o r o has m a r r i e d K i r i g a ' s d a u g h t e r and t h e r e f o r e c a l l s him a t o v a [ w i f e ' s f a t h e r ] . I t w i l l be n o t e d t h a t t h e w i v e s a r e o f t h e same c l a n as t h e i r h u s b a n d s . ( W i l l i a m s 1930: 132) W i l l i a m s s t a t e s t h a t t h e above two m a r r i a g e s "...were n o t r e g a r d e d w i t h any d i s a p p r o v a l " ( i b i d . ) . Why n o t ? By way o f a r g u m e n t , we can b e g i n w i t h t h e h y p o t h e s i s t h a t t h e r e i s an u n d e r l y i n g c o n s i s t e n c y t o O r o k a i v a s t a t e -ments c o n c e r n i n g ' c l a n ' exogamy, and t h e endogamous m a r r i a g e s r e c o r d e d above. P e r h a p s t h e above two m a r r i a g e s c o m p l i e d w i t h t h e above two s t a t e m e n t s : (a) t h e r e was someone to pay t h e b r i d e p f i c e , and (b) h u s b a n d and w i f e d i d n o t have any h e r a t u i n common. G i v e n m u l t i p l e hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , t h e a t t a i n m e n t o f b o t h t h e s e c o n d i t i o n s a p p e a r s p l a u s i b l e . T h a t t h e s e two m a r r i a g e s o c c u r r e d b e t ween i n d i v i d u a l s r e c o g n i z i n g t h e same ' c l a n name' and an a s s o c i a t e d h e r a t u does n o t , m o r e o v e r , n e c e s s a r i l y d e t e r f r o m t h i s s u g g e s t i o n . I f Oro-k a i v a c o m m u n i t i e s emerge a r o u n d a b i g - m a n , a embo-j a v o a r i --"the man who g i v e s t h e name" ( i b i d . : 104) -- u n d e r h i s p r i n c i p a l h ae, t h i s i s n o t t o s a y t h a t t h e hae i d e n t i f i c a -t i o n s of t h e c o n s t i t u e n t members o f t h a t c o l l e c t i v i t y a r e n e g a t e d . -102-In short, what might have occurred in the above two marriages is a 'realignment' of hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s , such that wife-givers could oppose wife-takers for the purposes of exchange. The above interpretation would be consistent with the findings of McKellin for the Managalase. Here the agan . . . i s the basic s o c i a l unit of exchange. The mixed c r i t e r i a of l i n e a l i t y , t e r r i t o r -i a l i t y , and exchange/commensality jo i n to define the agan in feasting situations, either as part of the productive feasts of the agan, the maturity feasts or the large exchanges given for affines. In each of these contexts the identity of the agan is determined by the composition of the opposing agan; i . e . wife-givers--and wife takers. Exchange, as a defining p r i n c i p l e , does not produce a neat set of groups in opposition. This results from the potential dual a f f i l i a t i o n of an individual to the agan( s ) of either parent. (McKellin 1980: 238-39) Marriage within the Managalase agan is considered "disrup-tive and dangerous": Not only do the two risk death from the re-joining of s i r u [moisture, flesh] and aj ide [strength, power] established through l i n e a l or t e r r i t o r i a l r e lations, their marriage forces co-operating members of an agan to become affines with exchange rather than commensal re-lations. ( i b i d . : 211) Nevertheless, marriages within an agan.do occur ( i b i d . : 214); and these 'intra-agan' marriages are accom through a 'readjustment' of plant emblems or aza ( i b i d . ) . -103-McKellin's i l l u s t r a t i o n of what such a 'readjustment' looks l i k e i s given below. AGAN 1) AE ABCD FG ( i b i d . : 216) FG A, B, C, D, E, F, and G represent grandparental aza (cf. i b i d . : 237). The above example i l l u s t r a t e s the dropping of the g i r l ' s paternal a f f i l i a t i o n s ; the bridewealth is then paid to a representative of the g i r l ' s maternal a f f i l i a t i o n s , i . e . a mother's brother ( i b i d . : 214). Thus AB and AE avoid being opposed as wife-giver to wife-taker. Williams recorded another accepted Orokaiva marriage that resembles the preceding Managalase 'problem'. -104-A 1 Hotata Williams writes: Kotutu - Haremi In this case Kotutu and Haremi are b i t e -pemi [elder brother; a l l males of the speaker's•clan and generation who are senior to him] and biteambo [younger brother; a l l males of speaker's clan and generation who are younger to him] to one another, and Hotata is i a i [daughter] to her husband. The Managalase processes of s o c i a l realignment — whereby individuals become 'marriageable' or, for that matter, 'non-marriageable' -- suggest that what needs to be investigated i s whether or not the Orokaiva do manipulate hae i d e n t i f i -cation in r e l a t i o n to marriage. If the Orokaiva do manipulate hae for the purpose of creating marital e l i g i b i l i t y or i n e l i g i b i l i t y , the problem then becomes one of determining the degree to which this manipulation stems from the strategic exploitation of l i n e a l , t e r r i t o r i a l , and exchange/commensal 'lin e s ' of shared ahihi, hamo and/or ivo. (Williams 1930: 132) -105-d) L i n e a l i t y , T e r r i t o r i a l i t y , and Exchange/Commensality The preceding discussion suggests two possible con-figurations of l i n e a l , t e r r i t o r i a l , and exchange/commensal ties for the context of marriage. In considering the examples of Orokaiva 'intra-clan' marriage, one of the major implications is that exchange as an organizing pr i n c i p l e w i l l oppose ties of l i n e a l i t y and t e r r i t o r i a l i t y in the opposition of wife-givers to wife-takers, in much the same way as i t can for the Managalase (McKellin op. c i t . : 238-39). At another l e v e l , the individual's potential dual a f f i l i a t i o n with maternal and paternal kinsmen vis a vis maternal and paternal hae, suggests that exchange may serve to reinforce the "intersection" (cf. Wagner 1967 ,. 1969) of l i n e a l and/or t e r r i t o r i a l ties (through either bride or groom) with ties of commensality. That i s , since both bride and groom potentially share hae with both their maternal and paternal kinsmen (see Chapter Two), affines who in other contexts may identif y with different-hae.may choose ( i f the choice is there) to ide n t i f y with a common hae in order to stand as either wife-givers or wife-takers. IV Death and Community Although there is some data that would suggest mortuary a c t i v i t i e s might be on the wane (Crocombe 1967), Schwimmer -106-witnessed, but did not describe, a quite sizable mortuary feast in 1967 (Schwimmer 1973: .164). The only detailed account of Orokaiva mortuary a c t i v i t i e s i s Williams' (1930). These proceedings Williams divided into five "stages". (1) F i r s t come the ceremonies of actual b u r i a l which are followed by the widow's seclusion... (2) The widow emerges from her seclusion and assumes the jacket which is the special sign of mourning... [There occurs at this time a feast, called pusu-ij ukaj (3) The widow discards her mourning jacket, and the other mourners give up the voluntary taboos they have undergone... After a pro-tracted general taboo on the food supplies, there follows, (4) An important ceremonial feast and  dance, accompanied among the northern tribes by a dramatic performance. (5) The last of the mortuary ceremonies is the r i t u a l disposal of the paraphenalia of this dance and drama.... (Williams 1930: 210; emphasis mine) Here death i n i t i a t e s a series of contexts in which relations between the l i v i n g and the dead are very much to the fore. It w i l l therefore be argued that death provides for the inter-section of both planes of s o c i a l i t y (the l i v i n g ; the l i v i n g and the dead) which a r t i c u l a t e the contexts out of which may c r y s t a l l i z e particular orderlngs of people sharing a hae. Among the Orokaiva, death is recognized by the cessa-tion of breathing. When a man dies, the sovai that he be-comes i s believed to hover nearby and lurk about the v i l l a g e ( i b i d . : 269). These sovai can take on various forms, such as a cuscus, bird, pig, and so on ( i b i d . : 270). -107-The mourning that follows death i s , in the words of Williams, "exuberantly" conducted: The corpse is embraced and people j o s t l e each other to be near i t ; men and women f l i n g themselves about and go into shaking f i t s in their grief; b i t s of glass or knives are taken up by some of the mourners, who cut and gash themselves while others w i l l chew poisonous roots, or beat themselves with clubs, or, occasion-a l l y , attempt (and sometimes accomplish) suicide in their grief ( i b i d . : 213-14) . When the corpse is ready to be buried^"'" an "elderly man" stands over i t and makes some sort of eulogy. Williams provides us with the "essence" of one these eulogies: 'Go now to a good place, not an e v i l one; go to the road of sunshine, not to the road of the rains; go where there are neither mosquitoes nor march-f l i e s , b u t where there are pigs in plenty and taro in plenty. Send us  pigs and send us taro, and we shall  make a feast in your honour, and pay-ment to those who have mourned for you . ( i b i d . : 214-15; emphasis mine) The feasting that follows has in part the purpose of placating the sovai; additionally, small platforms (harau) are built, upon which small offerings of taro, areca nut, tobacco, and other foods are placed for the, sovai ( i b i d . : 284-85; see also the above discussion of food offerings in connection with b i r t h ) . In the above 'address' the deceased -108-i s i n v o k e d as one who h e l p s , s e n d i n g t a r o and p i g s , t h u s t h e l i v i n g and t h e "dead c o - o p e r a t e . The r e l a t i o n s h i p be-tween t h e l i v i n g and t h e dead i s , t h e n , i n d i g e n o u s l y acknow-l e d g e d as more t h a n a l i n e a l t i e , i t i s a l s o a r e l a t i o n s h i p o f e x c h a n g e and c o m m e n s a l i t y ( c f . M c K e l l i n op. c i t . : 1 5 5 - 5 6 ) , a p o i n t a l r e a d y t o u c h e d upon i n t h e above d i s c u s s i o n o f b i r t h and community. a) The ' P u s u - I j u k a and t h e N a t e r a r i F e a s t As W i l l i a m s ' summary ( s e e a b o v e ) shows, t h e r e a r e two p r i n c i p a l f e a s t s i n i t i a t e d by d e a t h . Some months a f t e r t h e pusu-i.1 u k a ( d e s c r i b e d b e l o w ) , a " p r o t r a c t e d g e n e r a l t a b o o " on f o o d s u p p l i e s i s t a k e n up. T h i s t a b o o i s marked by t h e p u b l i c d i s p l a y o f a c a r v e d p o s t o r n a t e r a r i , w h i c h r e p r e s e n t s t h e d e c e a s e d ' s p l a n t emblem. ( W i l l i a m s 1925 : 412-14"; 1930: 2 2 5 - 2 9 ) . The pus i - i j u k a i s a f e a s t m a r k i n g t h e end o f t h e widow's ( o r w i d o w e r ' s ) s e c l u s i o n . The name " p u s i - i j u k a " d e r i v e s f r o m t h e m o u r n e r s ' c u s t o m o f s m e a r i n g t h e m s e l v e s w i t h mud, f r o m w h i c h t h e y got t h e name pusu embo, o r 'muddy-men' ( i b i d . 1930: 2 1 1 ) . The f e a s t on t h i s o c c a s i o n i s c a l l e d p u s u - i j u k a , l i t . ' the c o u n t i n g o f t h e mud', i . e . t h e r e c k o n i n g by w h i c h t h e p usu-embo...are p a i d f o r t h e i r e f f o r t s a t t h e f u n e r a l . The p e o p l e o f t h e de-c e a s e d h u s b a n d p r o v i d e t h e b u l k o f t h e p r o v i s i o n s f o r t h i s f e a s t , b u t t h e y a r e  a s s i s t e d by t h e p e o p l e of t h e widow. A l l -109-the mourners who paid the deceased the f i n a l compliment of bedaubing themselves with mud, of wailing, or of digging his grave, are ent i t l e d to receive their 'payment'; but relatives on both hus-band's and wife's side w i l l contribute. ( i b i d . : 218; emphasis mine) We see, then, that both the deceased's consanguines and affines make payment to the pusu embo. But what is.the relationship of the pusu embo to the deceased? Here we have l i t t l e to go by. Williams recorded that, at the bur i a l of a woman, she stood in the relationships of aj a (mother, mother s i s t e r , a l l females of mother's clan and generation; elder woman in general), tata (father's s i s t e r , female of father's clan and generation; maternal uncle's wife), imboti (wife's mother; female of the preceding generation within the wife's clan; wife's father's s i s t e r ) , d_u, and hovatu (wife's s i s t e r ; female of wife's clan and generation; brother's wife or fe-male of her clan and generation) to the young men who acted as gravediggers, "...and they came from six different v i l l a g e s " ( i b i d . : 214). , Clearly, both the deceased's consanguines and affines also take part in the mourning proceedings as pusu embo, and so stand as recipients at the pusu-i j uka. There is another level of exchange which also occurs at.this time: -110-Apart, however, from this paying of the nondescript body of mourners to which both groups contribute, i t is evident that on the occasion of the gorukari [the coming out of seclusion] the people of the deceased husband make some payment of food to those of the widow. ( i b i d . : 218-19; emphasis mine) Two levels of prestation are therefore associated with the pusu ijuka: Payment by the "people" of the widow(er) and the deceased to the pusu embo, and by the deceased's "people" to his or her affines. Williams provides us with much less d e t a i l concerning the feast associated with the naterari post, other than to say that the food taboo i s imposed upon the " v i l l a g e " , and especially on the coconuts ( i b i d . : 226). Schwimmer, some-what more spe c i f i c , s t a t e s that at this mortuary feast coco-nuts "...are the p r i n c i p a l object of mediation between the  plant emblem group of the deceased and the v i l l a g e which has provided services to that deceased at the time of death" (Schwimmer 1973: 164; emphasis mine). Further along, however, Schwimmer states that the recipients of the mortuary coco-nuts are the deceased's affines ( i b i d . ) . It can be seen how Schwimmer's account of the naterari feast p a r a l l e l s Williams' account of the pusu-ij uka: Both accounts generally indicate two levels of exchange: -111-A (a) Schwimmer: hae group > 'those who provided services' i . e . mourners. (b) Williams: deceased & » mourners (pusu embo) widow's group B (a) Schwimmer: deceased's * affines "kinsmen" (b) Williams: deceased's • » affines "people" figure (a) Focusing on the f i r s t exchange, A, I would l i k e to suggest the following: The people of both the deceased and the widow(er) who contribute to the 'payment' of the pusu  embo, or those who provided 'services', constitute a hae community that has " c r y s t a l l i z e d " out of the mortuary context. It may be that those who i d e n t i f i e d with the deceased's hae when he was l i v i n g j oin in contributing their coconuts and other sorts of food to the feast. Then again, given the ego-centered nature of hae groupings, and the concomit-ant m u l t i p l i c i t y of hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s an individual may have, what may be occurring is the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of the deceased with a hae community which has desired to number the deceased among them. In either case there appears to be an i n i t i a l ambiguity as to who w i l l identify with the deceased. The consanguineal and a f f i n a l relations of the deceased who make payment to the pusu embo thus constitute an emer-12 gent community in contrast to the pusu embo. Within the context of death this "nondescript" ( i b i d . : 218) group of -112-mourners acts as a so c i a l catalyst in the c r y s t a l i z a t i o n of a community: Who w i l l pay the mourners? Turning to exchange B, between the deceased's "kinsmen" or "people" and the deceased's af f i n e s , the nature of the relationship between the deceased -- now a sovai possessing a s i s i or ahihi — and the l i v i n g , i s argued by Schwimmer to be symbolically mediated by the coconuts given at a mortuary feast. The coconuts of a dead leader are thought to contain his ivo in a form which is communicable, not to his kins-men to whom these coconuts are taboo, but p a r t i c u l a r l y to his affines. (Schwimmer 1973: 164) -Concerning the question 'whose coconuts?', Williams' account states that the naterari taboo is placed on the v i l l a g e ' s coconuts (Williams 1930: 206). Again, I would argue that those who id e n t i f y with the naterari, which represents the deceased's hae (or perhaps a hae i d e n t i f i e d with the deceased), are the contributers to this feast. So, inasmuch as the naterari taboo i s recognized, the coconuts donated under this taboo can indeed be thought of as, in the above case, the "leader's". Now, the ivo of the deceased, according to Schwimmer's 13 account, comes to be shared by the deceased's "affi n e s " . , but at the same time those who recognized the naterari taboo i d e n t i f i e d with the deceased. The implication is that, through the exchange (B) the naterari donors ('consanguines'?) -113-establish an exchange/commensal t i e of shared ivo with the naterari recipients ("affines"). b) Summary Death among the Orokaiva i n i t i a t e s a series of events two of which are . the pusu-1.1 uka and the naterari feasts. Both these events generate contexts for community, contexts for the emergence of def i n i t e hae groupings. Both the pusu-ij uka and the naterari feasts reveal two levels of exchange. At the f i r s t l e v e l , the deceased's "people" and the widow(er)'s "people" conjoin to identif y with the deceased by cooperating in the payment of the mourners, or pusu embo. At the second l e v e l , exchange B, the deceased's "people" arid the widow(er)'s "people" appear d i f f e r e n t i a t e d , in that the exchange opposes them. At the same time, however, the deceased's affines and consanguines create r e l a t i o n a l ties of shared ivo. By both sharing ivo with the deceased, the donors and recipients p a r t i c i p a t i n g in exchange B thus (in theory) establish an exchange/commensal basis for com-munity in the future, while d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g themselves in the present. The two levels of exchange that underlie the pusu- . i j uka and the naterari feast may be seen as the expression of an essential tension inherent in.the emergence of community. As a result of death, as with birth and marriage, ambiguities -114-are required to be (at least temporarily) resolved. To join the ranks of the pusu embo or claim hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with the deceased, to identif y with the deceased's, or with the widow(er)'s, "people", these are the pr i n c i p l e choices that come to the fore. And the hae groupings that emerge reveal the decisions made. Yet, in the f i n a l feast given (the naterari), t h e ivo that i s s h a r e d b e t w e e n the livi n g s as well as between.the l i v i n g and the dead, serves to open the ambiguities again, and invite new so c i a l alignments. Although the associated ties of l i n e a l i t y and t e r r i -t o r i a l i t y can only be speculated upon in this context, the intersection of both planes of s o c i a l i t y with respect to shared ivo suggests a complex configuration of l i n e a l , ter-r i t o r i a l , and exchange/commensal " l i n e s " similar to that de-lineated from the context of b i r t h . * * * * In generating a context for community, a death draws closer, and renews the bonds between, the l i v i n g and the dead. During mortuary r i t u a l s the deceased (sovai) are called upon to witness the proceedings; offerings of food to the sovai are made; and in the associated dances and dramas sovai are hailed to attend and be present while sovai are impersonated (Williams 1930: 230-59). The hae groupings that therefore emerge, become consociates with the dead -115-through ties of l i n e a l i t y and exchange/commensality, each hae grouping forming with the dead "...one communal Gemein-schaft" (McKellin op. c i t . : 156). -116-Footnotes to Chapter Three ^' ' The presence of water in Schwimmer's description seems assumed, and thus problematic i f the description is taken to be . representative of this sort of r i t u a l . Williams records a number of sovai habitations as being streams or pools,, but water is not the only habitation of sovai (Williams .1930: 265-87). 2 Tr a d i t i o n a l l y , an Orokaiva might have three types of names: (a) a hick-name or "small name" ( j avo isapa); (b) the name of a s l a i n victim of murder, either bestowed or acquired; (c) a "name proper" (javo be), which i s that of a person's tato (cf. Schwimmer 1973: 78; Williams 1930: 97, 175-77). It i s this last name, the javo be, and the r e l a t i o n -ships i t represents that i s of interest here. 3 The analysis deals only with the male tato r e l a t i o n -ship, as this i s the relationship primarily discussed by Williams and, inasmuch as the Jarata case i s a tato r e l a t i o n -ship, by Schwimmer. 4 . The name given i s not the ajume's, but some other. Rohatynskyj's analysis suggests that what is important is not the name i t s e l f so much as the relationship that name is understood to si g n i f y . The Orokaiva material, however, indicates that the javo be has i t s e l f a t e r r i t o r i a l associa-tion. S i g n i f i c a n t l y , the Omie word aru'ahe, in addition to being glossed " s p i r i t of the dead", i s also glossed " s p i r i t of the l i v i n g i n d i v i d u a l " (Rohatynskyj op. c i t . : 211). Both Orokaiva and Omie b e l i e f systems, then, contain the notion that both the l i v i n g and the dead have some sort of s p i r i t "substance" ( a s i s i and aru'ahe respectively). ^' This would be especially relevant i f the tato was established between a child and an ancestor, vis I ^ -vis the sharing of that ancestor's name (Williams 1930: 96). ^' Schwimmer records that when a boy can walk his parents take him to the land to which they have claims (gar-dening claims as well as claims to hunt and f i s h ) . There for the f i r s t time the child is shown the hae associated with that land (Schwimmer 1981: ms). -117-F o o t n o t e s to C h a p t e r Three ( c o n t ' d ) Rohatynskyj. o b s e r v e s t h a t , where the a j ume i s a p a t e r n a l k i n s m e n , " . . . i t i s u s u a l l y the r e s u l t o f a c l o s e m a r r i a g e or poor a f f i n a l r e l a t i o n s " ( R o h a t y n s k y j op. c i t . : 178). Whether o r n o t t h i s I s t h e c a s e among the O r o k a i v a r e m a i n s an e t h n o g r a p h i c q u e s t i o n . 9 . Now, one c a n n o t marry b o t h c r o s s - c o u s i n s , so the use of " b i l a t e r a l " i n t h i s c o n t e x t i s i t s e l f c o n f u s i n g . What Schwimmer was p r o b a b l y t r y i n g to say i s t h a t e i t h e r a m a t r i l a t e r a l o r a p a t r i l a t e r a l c r o s s - c o u s i n i s a p r e f e r r e d m a r r i a g e p a r t n e r . " A m b i l a t e r a l " would i n t h i s c ase be more a c c u r a t e than " b i l a t e r a l " . The i m p o r t a n c e o f s i b l i n g s h i p as an o r g a n i z a t i o n a l mode i n New G u i n e a s o c i e t i e s (as w e l l as o t h e r O c e a n i c s o c i e t i e s , c f . M a r s h a l l (ed) 1981) i s now a x i o m a t i c ( c f . B u r r i d g e 1959, 1969 , K e 1 l y 1977). Of s i b l i n g s h i p among the O r o k a i v a , however, a l m o s t n o t h i n g i s known. That the Oro-k a i v a a p p a r e n t l y t h i n k of s i b l i n g s as s h a r i n g hae (Schwimmer 1973: 206) and simbo as not ( i b i d . ) l e a v e s a number 6f un-answered q u e s t i o n s , e.g.: I f a f a t h e r and h i s son -- or f o r t h a t m a t t e r any s e t of i n d i v i d u a l s s p a n n i n g more than one g e n e r a t i o n -- s h a r e hae, can they then be t h o u g h t of as s i b l i n g s ? ; Can (and do) t h e y use s i b l i n g t e r m i n o l o g y ? B e s i d e s t h e " s i b l i n g " and simbo c a t e g o r i e s , do hae e n t e r i n as d e t e r -m i n a n t s o f o t h e r k i n c a t e g o r i e s ? As i t now must be, though p r i o r to p a c i f i c a t i o n a p r a c t i c e g e n e r a l t o t h e N o r t h e r n D i s t r i c t was the c o n s t r u c -t i o n 0 f a d r i p p i n g p i t , which may or may n o t have been f o l l o w ed by a b u r i a l of the r e m a i n s ( c f . M c K e l l i n 1980). B u r i a l i s now done o u t s i d e o f the v i l l a g e , but d u r i n g W i l l i a m s ' s t a y the O r o k a i v a were s t i l l b u r y i n g the c o r p s e b e n e a t h t h e i r h o u s e s , as w e l l as ' h a n g i n g them out to d r y ' , d e s p i t e admin-i s t r a t i v e p r o t e s t s ( c f . W i l l i a m s 1930: P l a t e s XXVII, X X V I I I ) . 12 . I assume the m o r t u a r y c e r e m o n i e s g i v e n f o r a woman I n v o l v e s o c i a l a l i g n m e n t s not q u a l i t a t i v e l y d i f f e r e n t from t h o s e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h a d e c e a s e d male. The i n t e n s i t y of the m ourning i s i d e n t i c a l ( W i l l i a m s 1930: 214); and widowers go i n t o s e c l u s i o n as w e l l ( i b i d . : 2 17). 13. In the l i g h t of p r e v i o u s d i s c u s s i o n , I r e c o g n i z e ' t h i s c a t e g o r y as an ambiguous one. -1 l i f t Chapter Four Summary and Conclusions -118-I. Summary In Chapter One the p r i n c i p a l problem addressed by this thesis was l a i d o*ut : How can we best conceptualize and subsequently analyze Orokaiva s o c i a l i t y ? Four 'paradigms of order' were considered, Crocombe & Hogbin's, Rimoldi's, Williams' and Schwimmer's. In each case, there was revealed a disjunction between what has been identifed as p a t r i l i n e a l descent on the one hand, and the actual organization of Orokaiva society into 'groups' ("clan", "clan-branch", lineage", "sub-lineage") on the other. This disjunction was shown to be most apparent in relation to the sharing of a common name, primarily a plant emblem or hae name. Since plant emblems or hae appeared to play a role in demarcating the 'group' at each i d e n t i f i e d level of inclusion, the following proposition suggested i t s e l f : A l l Orokaiva groupings are plant emblem groupings. If we accept this proposition,, I argued, i t follows that an analysis of this central Orokaiva symbol of s o c i a l i t y w i l l provide an entry into the ideological components of Orokaiva s o c i a l i t y re-levant to Orokaiva group formation generally. Having encountered with each 'paradigm of order' a general disagreement as to what the actual alignments are, adopting the above proposition allowed the analysis to jump out of the ideology/practice disjunction and move towards a consideration of the meanings attached to the sharing of hae -119-as s u c h . T h i s move was f u r t h e r e d by t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t O r o k a i v a p l a n t emblems do n o t p r o p e r l y c o n s t i t u t e i d i o m s o f d e s c e n t ; p l a n t emblem g r o u p s , t h e r e f o r e , s h o u l d n o t be t h o u g h t o f as d e s c e n t g r o u p s . The p r o b l e m o f O r o k a i v a s o c i a l i t y came t o t h i s : I f t h e O r o k a i v a employ p l a n t emblems i n s y m b o l i z i n g t h e i r c o r -p o r a t e n e s s and s o c i a l i t y , and i f t h i s c o r p o r a t e n e s s c a n n o t be a d e q u a t e l y a c c o u n t e d f o r i n t e r m s o f t h e o d e r i n g s " c l a n " , " l i n e a g e " , and so on, what model w i l l ? D i s a s s o c i a t i n g hae o r h e r a t u ; and any g r o u p i n g s - t h a t s h a r e hae f r o m t h e ' p r o b l e m a t i c ' o f d e s c e n t opened t h e way f o r a c l o s e r a n a l y s i s o f t h e s o c i a l i m p l i c a t i o n s s h a r i n g a hae has among t h e O r o k a i v a . The m o r a l c o n t e n t o f hae s y m b o l i s m was s u b s e q u e n t l y d e l i n e a t e d , w h i l e t h e n a t u r e o f hae i d e n t i -f i c a t i o n i t s e l f -- r e v e a l e d most c l e a r l y I n i n s t a n c e s o f p l u r a l hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and t h e i n v e n t i o n o f p e r s o n a l hae -- s u g g e s t e d a c o r r e s p o n d i n g t a c t i c a l component. I n c o n s t r u c t i n g a p a r a d i g m t h a t w o u l d b e g i n w i t h t h e O r o k a i v a p l a n t emblem, and a r t i c u l a t e t h e d y n a m i c and f l u c t u a t i n g n a t u r e of O r o k a i v a s o c i a l i t y i n t e r m s o f p l a n t emblem i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , I t u r n e d t o t h e c o n c e p t o f community. I n b o t h t h e I n t r o d u c t i o n and C h a p t e r One I d e v e l o p e d t h e n o t i o n o f community as a p a r t i c u l a r k i n d o f p r o c e s s . One o f ' t e n s i o n and c o n f l i c t ' , t h i s p r o c e s s i n v o l v e s a ' t o and f r o m ' movement between two p o l e s o f s o c i a l i t y : A s h a r e d -120-q u a l i t y or s t a t e of b e i n g -- t h a t i s , a sen s e of s o m e t h i n g s h a r e d -- on the one hand, and the r e a l i z a t i o n o f t h a t " c o n s c i o u s n e s s o f k i n d " i n some s o r t of phenomenal o r d e r i n g , o n t h e o t h e r . ''•As a p a r a d i g m t h a t c o u l d b e g i n w i t h the O r o k a i v a p l a n t emblem, the c o n c e p t of "community" as d e v e l o p e d was found to be p a r t i c u l a r l y a p t . By h a v i n g b o t h m o r a l and t a c t i c a l meaning, hae or h e r a t u as symbols o f community r e f l e c t e d the t e n s i o n c o n t a i n e d i n the p r o c e s s of community i t s e l f : The p r e s e n c e o f b o t h m o r a l and t a c t i c a l meaning i n d i c a t e d the p o t e n t i a l f o r ' t e n s i o n and c o n f l i c t ' -- an u n c e r t a i n t y -- a s s o c i a t e d w i t h hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n i n the f o r m a t i o n o f phenomenal o r d e r i n g s . In C h a p t e r Two I e x p l o r e d the bases f o r hae i d e n t i f i -c a t i o n , w i t h a view towards u n d e r s t a n d i n g s o m e t h i n g o f the i n d i g e n o u s a m b i g u i t i e s and o p t i o n s o f O r o k a i v a s o c i a l i t y . I began by a r g u i n g t h a t the f l u c t u a t i n g n a t u r e of O r o k a i v a s o c i a l i t y i n d i c a t e s the p o t e n t i a l f o r a m b i g u i t y and o p t a -t i o n w i t h r e s p e c t to a f f i l i a t i o n . M o r e o v e r , p o t e n t i a l a m b i g u i t y and o p t a t i o n was ar g u e d to be, not a c u l t u r a l a b e r r a t i o n , but i n t e g r a l to the p r o c e s s of O r o k a i v a s o c i a l i t y . S i n c e hae or h e r a t u a p p e a r e d to be the c e n t r a l symbol o f . O r o k a i y a s o c i a l i t y , the p r i n c i p a l symbol whereby s o c i a l c o l l e c t i v e s a r e d i f f e r e n t i a t e d and i n d i v i d u a l s a r e c o l l e c -t i v i z e d , f o c u s i n g , on the ways i n which hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s -121-a r e r a t i o n a l i z e d r e v e a l e d an i m p o r t a n t complex of i n t e r -r e l a t e d I d e a s . I d e s i g n a t e d t h i s i d e a complex an ' i d e o l o g y o f community'. And i t was t h i s ' i d e o l o g y o f community' t h a t r e v e a l e d s o m e t h i n g o f t h e s t r u c t u r e o f O r o k a i v a a f f i l i a t i v e a m b i g u i t i e s and o p t i o n s . I showed t h a t t h e r e are t h r e e o r d e r i n g components or p r i n c i p l e s -- l i n e a l i t y , t e r r i t o r i a l i t y , and exchange/commen-s a l i t y -- w h i c h a r e i n t e r r e l a t e d i n a v a r i e t y of ways. Though a p p e a r i n g t o s t a n d t o g e t h e r by v i r t u e o f t h e f a c t t h a t each i s d e l i n e a t e d from a range of i n d i g e n o u s r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n s g i v e n f o r hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , t h e s e t h r e e s t r u c t u r i n g p r i n -c i p l e s were shown to be f u r t h e r l i n k e d t h r o u g h a c o n n e c t i o n w i t h O r o k a i v a n o t i o n s of " s u b s t a n c e " -- hamo, a h i h i , arid i v o -- and t h e p r i n c i p a l e l e m e n t s -- l a n d , t a r o , c o c o n u t s , and pork -- which m e d i a t e the s h a r i n g o f t h o s e " s u b s t a n c e s " . At the emic l e v e l , t h e s h a r i n g o f hae a p p e a r e d to c o r r e s p o n d to O r o k a i v a n o t i o n s of s h a r e d " s u b s t a n c e " . In C h a p t e r T h r e e , I t u r n e d to examine some of the c o n t e x t s f o r community g e n e r a t e d by the e v e n t s o f b i r t h , m a r r i a g e , and d e a t h . These e v e n t s , I a r g u e d , i n i t i a t e the emergence o f e x p l i c i t hae g r o u p i n g s , or c o m m u n i t i e s . S o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n — between the l i v i n g , and between the l i v i n g and the dead -- g e n e r a t e d by b i r t h , m a r r i a g e , and d e a t h , was a n a l y z e d i n o r d e r t o d e l i n e a t e t h e most e v i d e n t c o n f i g u r a t i o n s of l i n e a l , t e r r i t o r i a l , and exchange/commensal t i e s of " s u b s t a n c e " a s s o c i a t e d w i t h e a c h e v e n t . F o l l o w i n g from t h a t -122-idea complex termed an 'ideology of community', these con-figurations represented the cul t u r a l parameters that shape and constrain the social alignments emerging as hae groupings in each context. The b i r t h of a child was shown to i n i t i a t e a series of contexts serving to c u l t u r a l l y equip that child with a net-work of "substance" t i e s . These ties I argued, provide the ideological basis for subsequent so c i a l claims upon, and s o c i a l claims by ego. In the process of c u l t u r a l l y equipping the c h i l d , hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s and a f f i l i a t i o n s should thus come to the fore. At b i r t h , the I n i t i a l s o c i a l alignments of a c h i l d were shown to be l i n e a l l y and t e r r i t o r i a l l y established with the parents, as well as with some ancestor or predecessor. That i s , apart from ties of f i l i a t i o n , post-natal r i t u a l provided for future t e r r i t o r i a l and/or a f f i l i a t i v e claims by creating a l i n e a l tie 6 f ahihi and/or hamo between the child and some t e r r i t o r i a l l y - a s s o c i a t e d sovai. Birth was shown to further i n i t i a t e an ongoing r i t u a l 'service' (performed either on behalf of one's cftildren, or on behalf of oneself) of food offerings to sovai. These r i t u a l food offerings, together with the prestations surround-ing the tato relationship, represented the establishment of exchange and commensal ties between the l i v i n g and the dead. I therefore argued that the Intersection of r e l a t i o n a l ties - 1 2 3 -among t h e l i v i n g w i t h t h o s e r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h a t t h e l i v i n g h a v e w i t h t h e d e a d , r e s u l t i n a' c o m p l e x c o n f i g u r a t i o n o f l i n e a l i t y , t e r r i t o r i a l i t y , and e x c h a n g e / c o m m e n s a l i t y : T h r o u g h t i e s o f e x c h a n g e and c o m m e n s a l i t y w i t h t h e d e a d , " s u b s t a n c e " t i e s o f l i n e a l i t y and t e r r i t o r i a l i t y i n t e r s e c t i n s u c h a way t h a t a l i n e a l t i e can become a t e r r i t o r i a l t i e , and v i c e v e r s a . O r o k a i v a b e h a v i o r i n r e l a t i o n t o m a r r i a g e c an be c o n -v e n i e n t l y summed up i n t h e word " v a r i a b l e " . B o t h W i l l i a m s ( 1930 ) and Schwimmer ( 1973 ) a t t e m p t a d e l i n e a t i o n o f t h e ' r u l e s ' o f O r o k a i v a m a r r i a g e p r a c t i c e s . Bu t n e i t h e r a n a l y s t moves b e y o n d t h e d e l i n e a t i o n o f m a r r i a g e ' t e n d e n c i e s ' . I n o r d e r t o p e n e t r a t e t h e a m b i g u i t i e s and o p t i o n s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h O r o k a i y a m a r r i a g e , I b egan by c o r r e c t i n g S c h w i m m e r ' s more s e r i o u s m i s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s o f W i l l i a m s ' • d a t a . T h r o u g h a c r i t i c a l e x a m i n a t i o n o f S c h w i m m e r ' s d a t a on t he m e a n i n g o f s i m b o , I q u e s t i o n e d S c h w i m m e r ' s a s s e r t i o n o f t h e p r e s e n c e o f " a n e x p l i c i t r u l e o f p r e f e r e n t i a l b i l a t -e r a l c r o s s - c o u s i n m a r r i a g e " , and I a r g u e d a g a i n s t any a t t e m p t a t d e l i n e a t i n g c l e a r - c u t c a t e g o r i e s o f " m a r r i a g e -a b l e " and " n o n - m a r r i a g e a b l e " p e r s o n s . I n e x t c o n s i d e r e d t h e d e g r e e t o w h i c h t h e ' i d e o l o g y o f " c o m m u n i t y ' i n f o r m s t h e w h o l e q u e s t i o n o f m a r i t a l e l i g i b i l -i t y / i n e l i g i b i l i t y , and t h e eme rgence o f hae g r o u p i n g s o ppo sed as w i f e - g i v e r s t o w i f e - t a k e r s . D a t a was b r o u g h t t o --124-g e t h e r t h a t s u g g e s t e d O r o k a i v a m a r r i a g e can be b e t t e r u n d e r s t o o d t h r o u g h an e n q u i r y i n t o the s t r a t e g i c m a n i p u l a t i o n s o f hae or h e r a t u . Two p r i n c i p a l c o n f i g u r a t i o n s s u g g e s t e d t h e m s e l v e s ; t h a t , i n the c o n t e x t g e n e r a t e d by m a r r i a g e , exchange as an o r d e r i n g p r i n c i p l e might (a) oppose t i e s o f l i n e a l i t y and t e r r i t o r i a l i t y i n the o p p o s i t i o n of w i f e - g i v e r s to w i f e - t a k e r s , o r , a t a n o t h e r l e v e l , (b) r e i n f o r c e the " i n t e r s e c t i o n " of l i n e a l and/or t e r r i t o r i a l t i e s of " s u b s t a n c e " ( t h r o u g h e i t h e r b r i d e or groom) w i t h t i e s of c o m m e n s a l i t y . Two c o n t e x t s w h i c h a d e a t h g e n e r a t e s among the O r o k a i v a a r e the pusu-i.j uka and the n a t e r a r i f e a s t s . I showed how bo t h f e a s t s p a r a l l e l each o t h e r i n r e g a r d s to two l e v e l s of exchange: (a) the " p e o p l e " of the d e c e a s e d c o n j o i n w i t h the " p e o p l e " of the widow ( e r ) to make p r e s t a t i o n s to the mourners or pusu-embo; (b) the d e c e a s e d ' s " k i n s m e n " or " p e o p l e " make p r e s t a t i o n s to the d e c e a s e d ' s " a f f i n e s " . Both l e v e l s of exchange, I a r g u e d , g e n e r a t e a c o n t e x t from which c r y s t a l -l i z e s a community making i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h the d e c e a s e d , or i d e n t i f y i n g the d e c e a s e d w i t h them. Two d i f f e r e n t , though c e r t a i n l y n o t d i s c r e t e , hae g r o u p i n g s were t h e r e f o r e shown to emerge d u r i n g b o t h the p u s u - i j u k a and the n a t e r a r i f e a s t s . C o n j o i n e d i n making p r e s t a t i o n s to the mourners, the " p e o p l e " of the d e c e a s e d -125-subsequently di f f e r e n t i a t e d themselves, from the deceased's "affines", at the next l e v e l of exchange, while at the same time creating ties of shared ivo between the two parties, and between themselves and the deceased. * * * Thus the events of b i r t h , marriage, and death serve to "close" a f f i l i a t i v e ambiguities by requiring hae i d e n t i -fications to become v i s i b l e ; at the same time, new ties of "substance" are created, complicating old t i e s . Discerning a s o c i a l process that sees the events of bi r t h , marriage, and death "closing" a f f i l i a t i v e ambiguities while simultaneously creating the conditions for subsequent ambiguity and hae realignment, supports the contention that Orokaiva s o c i a l i t y i s best viewed as contextually emergent. Moreover, the notion of "community" that was developed in Chapter One, together with the 'ideology of community' delineated in Chapter Two, has been shown in Chapter Three to provide further insight into the a f f i l i a t i v e constraints and f l e x i b i l i t i e s of Orokaiva s o c i a l organization. II." Cone lus ion I conclude this chapter, and thesis, by considering one f i n a l implication of the Orokaiva system of plant emblem c l a s s i f i c a t i o n : The question of ontology and the category of -126-" p e r s o n " i n r e l a t i on to t h a t of "community". L l v i - S t r a u s s , i n d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g " t o t e m i s m " from the p l a n e o f " r e l i g i o n " , q u o t e s a p p r o v i n g l y T y l o r ' s o b s e r v a t i o n t h a t the r e l a t i o n s h i p , between totemism and r e l i g i o n "...has been e x a g g e r a t e d out of p r o p o r t i o n to i t s r e a l t h e o l o g i c a l m a g n i t u d e " ( T y l o r 1899: 144, q u o t e d i n L e v i - S t r a u s s 1963: 1 3 ) . B u r r i d g e n o t e s , however, t h a t i t i s " . . . j u s t t h i s i d e a of a s p e c i f i c o r g a n i z a t i o n a l m a t r i x i m p r i s o n i n g a p a r t i c u l a r mode of t h o u g h t t h a t has k e p t the p r o b l e m a l i v e " ( B u r r i d g e 1973a: 179). B u r r i d g e sees i n " t o t e m i s m " a p r o b l e m o f " d i s e n t a n g l i n g " (a) the phenomena of o r g a n i z a t i o n ; (b) the p r i n c i p l e s or s e t s o f r e l a t i o n s w h i c h , l y i n g b e h i n d the phenomena, form a system; and (c) an o n t o l o g y which must i n some way r e l a t e t h o s e p r i n c i p l e s . ( i b i d . ; emphasis mine) N o t w i t h s t a n d i n g t h e t h i n n e s s of t h e d a t a on O r o k a i v a n o t i o n s of " s u b s t a n c e s " , such as hamo, a h i h i , and i v o , i t i s p r e c i s e l y t h i s d a t a which i n d i c a t e s an o n t o l o g y (though not s y s t e m -a t i z e d as such) , a s e t of i d e a s h a v i n g to do w i t h the n a t u r e of b e i n g ( c f . B u r r i d g e 1973b), u n d e r l y i n g hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . Now, t h i s t h e s i s has m a i n l y c o n s i d e r e d s h a r e d *} " s u b s t a n c e " as a b a s i s f o r s h a r i n g hae. But i t i s a l s o the c a s e t h a t the O r o k a i v a f r e q u e n t l y " i n v e n t " p e r s o n a l hae f o r t h e m s e l v e s ( W i l l i a m s 1925: 421; 1930; 124-5). T h i s o b s e r v a t i o n would seem t o i m p l y t h a t O r o k a i v a n o t i o n s o f " s u b s t a n c e " , w h i l e c u l t u r a l l y c o n s t i t u t i n g t o g e t h e r w i t h hae a c u l t u r a l c o n c e p t of "community", at the same time p o i n t -127-to a cu l t u r a l concept of the "person". I do not wish to suggest that plant emblems symbol-ize any more than an aspect of "the person" among the Oro-kaiva: personal names (cf. f t n t . 2, Ch. I I ) , for example, may also have some bearing here (cf. Geertz 1977). On the other hand, the observation that hae operate to symbolize both "person" and "community" i s , I would argue, consistent with -- indeed, is a r e f l e c t i o n of -.- the general form of Orokaiva l i f e . Read's enquiry into the concept of the "person" among the Gahuku-Gama of the Eastern Highlands, produced this assessment: ...the ground of obligation is not con-ceived to l i e in human nature as such, either, that i s , in the nature of the agent himself or in the nature of other men as men; i t resides, rather, in the nature of the ties which link them  s o c i a l l y to one another ...there is no . e x p l i c i t separation of moral categories from the so c i a l context: the moral order and the soc i a l order are not differentiated conceptually. (Read 1955: 281; emphasis mine) The Gahuku-Gama, then, f a i l to "...distinguish an et h i c a l category of the person"; that i s , they do not grant the person an i n t r i n s i c moral worth, but rather a contextual worth ( i b i d . ) . In Williams' chapter on Orokaiva morality (1930: 308-33), esse n t i a l l y the same picture of the Orokaiva person emerges as that for the Gahuku-Gama. Williams found a marked difference -128-in behavior towards "...fellow men and men who are not fellows", i . e . an "intra-group" morality a n t i t h e t i c a l to an "extra-group" morality. If a man was expected to display a good temper, dignity, courtesy, and so on within the "sympathy group", he was equally expected to behave treach-erously, be objurate, truculent and at times blood-thirsty with those outside the "sympathy group". That the Orokaiva do not d i f f e r e n t i a t e the moral order from the s o c i a l order is well-expressed by Williams in his summary of "intra-group" morality: Not iffcontinence, for instance, but adultery is condemned, because a right of possession has been infringed; not gluttony, but greed, because others must suffer by i t . The point I am trying to make i s simply t h i s : ' If Orokaiva community is created in the event through the order-ing of ideas about "substance" and of symbols (hae or heratu) communicating those ideas, then the Orokaiva "person" i s so created as well. Ruber's analysis of the Anggor pig hunt makes precisely the same point: In k i l l i n g a pig, the Anggor man becomes, momentarily, the fulcrum of the community. By his act he carries the community a step forward in time, through the cycle of chants leading to sanindo hoeli [an elabor-ate f e s t i v i t y ] . He, himself, becomes the point of reference from which the consti-There i s l i t t l e , i f any centered righteousness. each virtue implies age , idea of a s e l f -On the contrary, nt and reagent. ( i b i d . : 322; emphasis mine) -129-tuent contrasts of the v i l l a g e are defined...He makes the structures of whole andvparts momentarily v i s i b l e in a certain way which starts from his own position in the community...he precipitates the community and thus  precipitates himself as a soc i a l person. (Huber 1980: 53; emphasis mine. cf. also Wagner 1981) Both "person" and "community", then, have no a p r i o r i existence for the Orokaiva apart from events, apart from action, apart from praxis, which serve to create both. And, in their emergence, "person" and "community" mutually de-termine each other. It is therefore apt that Orokaiva plant emblems should serve to symbolize both "person" and "community". One f i n a l observation. During i n i t i a t i o n , Orokaiva youths have imparted to them a set of behavioral ideals which Williams conveniently labelled the "otohu i d e a l " , after the ornamental insignia associated with these ideals (cf. Williams 1930: 203-6; 323; ;cf. also Schwimmer 1973 : 177-82 ; Beaver 1920). A person who conforms to these injunctions --one "...who did not quarrel, did not beat his wife or c h i l d -ren, ...did not s t e a l . . . " ( i b i d . : 204) -- and other expect-ations -- "...to be d i l i g e n t in the garden, in hunting and fis h i n g ; and to be .generous and he l p f u l . . . " ( i b i d . : 205) -- is otohu or otohu-embo. -130-Yet, in apparent contrast to the moral expectations that the Orokaiva have for each, Williams wrote: On the whole, one i s struck by a high degree of personal freedom. For... the native i s l e f t to do a good deal as he l i k e s ; so much so that one man, whatever his status, is reluctant to answer for another, to lay down what he w i l l or should do. 'He h i m s e l f , he w i l l say, with a certain i n f l e c t i o n of the voice that dismisses-all respon-s i b i l i t y . ( i b i d . : 326) As I have tried to show, these two aspects of Orokaiva l i f e i l l u s t r a t e d above are reflected in the nature of hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n i t s e l f . And i t is the combined moral and t a c t i c a l dimensions of hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n which provide the c u l t u r a l constitution of the Orokaiva "person" through hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with i t s particular dynamic. For, i n t r i n s to hae i d e n t i f i c a t i o n i s the dilemma of constraint, of containing self-willedness within the ambience of moral obligations (cf. Leroy 1979, Burridge 1969, 1979), such that the t a c t i c a l employment of hae remains a moral usage. The alternative is autonomy, and the negation, transendence, or transformation of the moral, and so the s o c i a l , order. 13» Map I I -BOUNDARY MOUNTAIN RANGES RIVERS •ROADS CENSUS DIVISIONS 1 - WARIA 2 - BINANDERE 3 - NORTH COAST 4 - AIGA 5 - SOHE POPONDETTA 6 - POPONETTA 7 - SAIHO 8 - HUJARA 9 - KOKODA 10 - WAWONGA 11 - MUSA 12 - MANAGALASE 13 - ORO BAY 14 - DYKE ACKLAND BAY 15 - CAPE NELSON 16 - COLLINGWOOD BAY Schwimmer 1970 BIBLIOGRAPHY I . Work C i t e d BARNES, J . A . 1962 A f r i c a n M o d e l s i n t h e New G u i n e a H i g h l a n d s . Man , 6 2 : 5 - 9 . R e p r i n t e d i n I . HOGBIN & L . R . HIATT ( e d s . ) R e a d i n g s i n A u s t r a l i a n and P a c i f i c ; A n t h r o p o l o g y . L ondon & New Y o r k : C a m b r i d g e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1 9 6 6 . BARKER, T . 1979 B a r a i G roup F o r m a t i o n . U n p u b l i s h e d P h . D . t h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y o f T o r o n t o . BATESON, G. 1958 N a v e n . . 2nd e d i t i o n . S t a n f o r d : S t a n f o r d U n i v e r -s i t y P r e s s . BEAVER, W.N. 1916 D e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e l i f e o f t h e O r o k a i v a . A n n u a l  R e p o r t ( T e r r i t o r y o f P a p u a ) , 1 9 1 4 - 1 5 , p p . 4 8 - 5 1 . 1920 The Use o f Emblems o r I n s i g n i a o f M a n - k i l l i n g among t h e O r o k a i v a T r i b e s o f t h e K u m u s i D i v i s i o n . A n n u a l R e p o r t ( T e r r i t o r y o f P a p u a ) , 1 9 1 8 - 1 9 , p p . 9 7 - 9 9 . BELSHAW, C . S . 1951 S o c i a l C o n s e q u e n c e s o f t h e M t . L a m i n g t o n E r u p t i o n , O c e a n i a , 2 1 : 2 4 1 - 5 2 . BERNDT, R .M . & P. LAWRENCE ( e d s . ) 1971 P o l i t i c s i n New G u i n e a . U n i v e r s i t y o f W e s t e r n A u s t r a l i a P r e s s . BLOCH, M. 1971 The m o r a l and t a c t i c a l m e a n i n g o f k i n s h i p t e r m s . Man ( n . s . ) , 6 ( 1 ) : 7 9 - 8 7 . BURRIDGE, K . O . L . 1957 D e s c e n t i n T a n g u . O c e a n i a , 2 7 ( 2 ) : 8 5 - 9 9 . 1959 S i b l i n g s i n T a n g u . O c e a n i a , 3 0 ( 2 ) : 1 2 8 - 5 4 . 1969 Tangu T r a d i t i o n s . P r e s s . L o n d o n : O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y . 3 3 BURRIDGE, K.O.L. 1973a E n c o u n t e r i n g A b o r i g i n e s . New Y o r k : Pergamon P r e s s I n c . 1973b L e v e l s of B e i n g . In Gene OUTKA & John P. REEDER, J r . ( e d s . ) R e l i g i o n and M o r a l i t y . New Y o r k : Anchor P r e s s . 1979 Someone, No One. P r i n c e t o n , N.J.: P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . CHINNERY, E.W.P. 1919 The B e l i e f i n S o u l and S o u l - S u b s t a n c e . Man, 19: 132-33. CHINNERY, E.W.P. & W.N. BEAVER 1916 The Movements of the T r i b e s of the Mambara, D i v -i s i o n of N o r t h e r n Papua (A p p e n d i x 2) and a Language C h a r t of the N o r t h e r n D i s t r i c t s of Papua (Ap p e n d i x 3 ) . A n n u a l R e p o r t ( T e r r i t o r y o f Pa p u a ) , 1914-15, pp. 158-70. COOK, E.A. 1970 On the c o n v e r s i o n o f n o n - a g n a t e s i n t o a g n a t e s . S o u t h w e s t e r n J o u r n a l o f A n t h r o p o l o g y , 26: 190-96. COPPET, D. de 1981 The L i f e - g i v i n g Death. i n S.C. HUMPHREYS & H. KING ( e d s . ) M o r t a l i t y - a n d I m m o r t a l i t y : The  A n t h r o p o l o g y and A r c h a e o l o g y of Death. New Y o r k : Academic P r e s s . CROCOMBE, R.G. 1966 A modern O r o k a i v a f e a s t . New G u i n e a R e s e a r c h  U n i t , 16. 1967 Four O r o k a i v a c a s h c r o p p e r s . New G u i n e a R e s e a r c h  U n i t , 16. CROCOMBE, R.G. & G.R. HOGBIN 1963 Land, Work and P r o d u c t i v i t y a t Inonda. New G u i n e a  R e s e a r c h U n i t , 2. DOGLIN, J . L . , D.S. KEMNITZER & D.M. SCHNEIDER ( e d s ) . 197 7 S y m b o l i c A n t h r o p o l o g y : A Reader i n the Study of  Symbols and Meaning! New Y o r k : C o l u m b i a U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . DURKHEIM, E. 1965 The E l e m e n t a r y Forms o f the R e l i g i o u s L i f e , ( t r a n s . J o s e p h W. Swain) New Y o r k : The F r e e P r e s s . DURKHEIM, E. 1973 On M o r a l i t y and S o c i e t y : S e l e c t e d R e a d i n g s . ( E d i t e d w i t h an I n t r o d u c t i o n by R.N. B e l l a h ) C h i c a g o & L o n d o n : U n i v e r s i t y o f C h i c a g o P r e s s . DUTTON, T. 1971 L a n g u a g e s o f S o u t h - E a s t P a p u a . P a c i f i c L i n g u i s -t i c s . S e r i e s A, No. 28, P a p e r s i n New G u i n e a L i n g u i s t i c s No. 14. A Note on D e s c e n t Groups i n P o l y n e s i a . Man, 57: 4-8. R e p r i n t e d i n P. BOHANNAN & J . MIDDLETON ( e d s . ) K i n s h i p and S o c i a l O r g a n i z a t i o n . New Y o r k N a t u r a l H i s t o r y P r e s s , 1968. FIRTH, R. 1957 GEERTZ, C. 1977 "From t h e N a t i v e ' s P o i n t o f V i e w " : On t h e N a t u r e o f A n t h r o p o l o g i c a l U n d e r s t a n d i n g . I h J . L . DOLGIN, e t . a l . GLASSE, R.M. & M.J. MEGGITT ( e d s . ) 196 9 P i g s , P e a r l s h e l l s and Women: M a r r i a g e i n t h e  New G u i n e a H i g h l a n d s . E n g l e w o o d C l i f f s , N . J . : P r e n t i c e - H a l l . GLICK, L.B. 1967 The r o l e o f c h o i c e i n G i m i k i n s h i p . Southwes t e r n  J o u r n a l o f A n t h r o p o l o g y , 2 3: 317-32. GOODENOUGH, W. 1964 I n t r o d u c t i o n . I n W. GOODENOUGH ( e d . ) E x p l o r a t i o n s  i n C u l t u r a l A n t h r o p d l o g y . New Y o r k : McGraw H i l l . GUSFIELD, J.R. 1975 Community: A C r i t i c a l R e s p o n s e . O x f o r d : B a s i l B l a c k w e l l . HILLARY, G.A. ' •"/ 1955 D e f i n i t i o n s o f Community: A r e a s o f A g r e e m e n t . R u r a l S o c i o l o g y , 2 0 ( 2 ) : 111-23. HUBER, P.B. 1980 The Anggo r bowman: r i t u a l and s o c i e t y i n M e l a n e s i A m e r i c a n E t h n o l o g i s t , 7: 43-57. KABERRY, P.M. 1967 The P l a s t i c i t y o f New G u i n e a K i n s h i p . I n M. FREEDMAN ( e d . ) S o c i a l O r g a n i z a t i o n . L o n d o n : F r a n k Cass & Co, KEESING, F.M. 1952 The Papuan Orokaiva versus Mt. Lamington: Culture Shbck and i t s Aftermath. Human Organ-i z a t i o n . 11: 16-22. KEESING, 'R.M. 1968 Non-unilineal descent and contextual d e f i n i t i o n of status: The Kwaio evidence. Amerlean  Anthropologist, 70: 82-4. 1971 Descent, Residence and Cultural Codes. In L. HAITT & C. JAYARWARDENA (eds.) Anthropology  in Oceania. Sydney: Angus & Robertson. KEIL, J.T. 1980 Prescription and improper marriage: Kin category, soc i a l group, and relationship terminology usage in Buin. Journal of Anthropological  Research, 36(4): 501-16. KELLY, R.C. 1977 Etoro Social Structure. Ann Arbor: . University of Michigan Press. LANGNESS, L.L. 1964 Some Problems in the Conceptualization of High-lands Social Structure. American Anthropologist, 66 (Special Publication): 162-82. Reprinted in I. HOGBIN & L.R. HIATT (eds.) Readings in  Australian and P a c i f i c Anthropology. London & New York: Cambridge University Press, 1966. LEEDEN, A.C. van der 1960 Social Structure in New Guinea. Bijdragen T-L-V, 116: 119-49. LEGGE, J.D 1956 Australian Colonial Policy. Sydney: Angus & Robertson. ' -LEPERVANCHE, M. de 1967 Descent, residence and"leadership in the New Guinea Highlands. Oceania; 38(2): 134-58; 38(3): 163-89. LEROY, J. 1979 The Ceremonial Pig K i l l of the South Kewa. Oceania, 49 (3): 179-209. LEVI-STRAUSS, C. 1963 Totemlsm. Boston: Beacon Press. 1976 The Savage Mind. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. McKELLIN, W. 1980 Kinship Ideology and Language Pragmatics among  the Managalase of Papua New Guinea. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Toronto. MAIR, L.P. 1948 Australia in New Guinea. London: Christophers. MARSHALL M. (ed.) 1981 Siblingship in Oceania. ASAO Monograph No. 8. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. MEGGITT, M.J. 1965 The Lineage System of the Mae Enge of New Guinea. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd. MONCKTON, C.A.W. 1921 Some Experiences of a New Guinea Resident Mag-is t r a t e . London: John Lane theBodley Head. 1922 Last Days in New Guinea. London: John Lane the Bodley Head. 1934 New Guinea Recollections. London: John Lane the Bodley Head. MURRAY, J.H.P. 1912 Papua or B r i t i s h New Guinea. New York: C. Scribbner's. OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY (Definition of) Community POUWER, J . 1960 'Loosely structured societies' in Netherlands New Guinea. Bijdragen T-L-V, 116: 109-18. 1961 New Guinea as a Field for Ethnological Study. Bijdragen T-L-V, 119-24. 1964 A Social System in the Star Mountains: Towards a Reorientation of the Study of Social Systems. In WATSON (ed.) New Guinea: The Central Highlands. American Anthropologist special publication, 66, pt. 2. I 31 POUWER, J . 1966a Towards a c o n f i g u r a t i o n a l a p p r o a c h t o s o c i e t y and c u l t u r e i n New G u i n e a . J o u r n a l o f the  P o l y n e s i a n S o c i e t y , 75: 267-86. 1966b S t r u c t u r e and F l e x i b i l i t y i n a New G u i n e a S o c i e t y A r e v i e w a r t i c l e . B i j d r a g e n T-L-V, 122: 158-69. READ, K.E. 1955 M o r a l i t y and the c o n c e p t of t h e P e r s o n among the Gahuku-Gama. O c e a n i a , 25: 234-82. REAY, M. 1953 S o c i a l c o n t r o l among the O r o k a i v a . O c e a n i a , 24: 110-18. 1959 The Kuma. M e l b o u r n e : M e l b o u r n e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . RIMOLDI, M. 1966 Land t e n u r e and l a n d use among t h e Mt. La m i n g t o n O r o k a i v a . New G u i n e a R e s e a r c h U n i t , 11. RIVERS, W.H.R. 1920 The c o n c e p t o f ' s o u l - s u b s t a n c e ' i n New G u i n e a and M e l a n e s i a . F o l k l o r e , 31: 48-69. ROHATYNSKYJ, M. 1978 Sex A f f i l i a t i o n among the Omie of Papua New G u i n e a . U n p u b l i s h e d Ph.D. t h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y o f T o r o n t o . SAHLINS, M. 1965 On the i d e o l o g y and c o m p o s i t i o n of d e s c e n t g r o u p s . Man, 65: 104-7. SALISBURY, R.F. 1956 U n i l i n e a l D e s c e n t Groups i n the New Guine a H i g h -l a n d s . Man, 56: 2-7. v 1964 New G u i n e a H i g h l a n d s models and d e s c e n t t h e o r y . Man, 64: 104-7. SANKOFF, G. 1972 C o g n i t i v e v a r i a b i l i t y and New G u i n e a S o c i a l O r g a n i z a t i o n ; The Buang Dgwa. Amer i c a n A n t h r o p o l o -g i s t , 7 4 ( 3 ) : 555-66. SCHEFFLER, H.W. 1965 C h o l s e u l I s l a n d S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e . B e r k l e y & L.A.: U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a P r e s s . 1966 A n c e s t o r Worship i n A n t h r o p o l o g y : Or, O b s e r v a -t i o n s on D e s c e n t and D e s c e n t Groups. C u r r e n t  A n t h r o p o l o g y , 7 ( 5 ) : 541-51. 133 SCHNEIDER, D.M. 1972 What i s k i n s h i p a l l a b o u t ? I n P. REINING ( e d . ) K i n s h i p S t u d i e s i n t h e Morgan C e n t e n n i a l Y e a r . W a s h i n g t o n ( D . C . ) : The A n t h r o p o l o g i c a l S o c i e t y o f W a s h i n g t o n , D.C. SCHWIMMER, E. 1967 Modern O r o k a i v a L e a d e r s h i p . J o u r n a l o f t h e Papua  New G u i n e a S o c i e t y , 1 ( 2 ) : 5 2 - 6 0 ^ 196 9 C u l t u r a l C o n s e q u e n c e s o f a V o l c a n i c E r u p t i o n e x p e r i e n c e d by t h e Mt. L a m i n g t o n O r o k a i v a . Eugene: Dept. o f A n t h r o p o l o g y , U n i v e r s i t y o f Oregon. 1970 E x c h a n g e i n t h e S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e o f t h e O r o k a i v a . Ph.D. t h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a 197 2 R e g i o n a l C o m m u n i c a t i o n Systems i n Papua and t h e P r o b l e m s o f S o c i a l B o u n d a r i e s : F i r s t P h a s e o f  a M u l t i d i s c i p l i n a r y I n q u i r y i n Human D i v e r s i t y . M a n u s c r i p t , U n i v e r s i t y o f T o r o n t o . 1973 E x c h a n g e i n t h e S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e o f t h e O r o k a i v a : New Y o r k : S t . M a r t i n ' s P r e s s . 1974 F r i e n d s h i p and K i n s h i p : An a t t e m p t t o r e l a t e two a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l c o n c e p t s . I n E. LEYTON ( e d . ) The Compact: S e l e c t e d D i m e n s i o n s o f F r i e n d s h i p . N e w f o u n d l a n d S o c i a l and E c o n o m i c P a p e r s No. 3. T o r o n t o : U n i v e r s i t y o f T o r o n t o P r e s s . 1977 What d i d t h e e r u p t i o n mean? I n M.D. L I E B E R ( e d . ) E x i l e s and M i g r a n t s i n O c e a n i a . ASAO Monograph No. 5. H o n o l u l u : U n i v e r s i t y o f H a w a i i P r e s s . 1981 I c o n s o f I d e n t i t y . M a n u s c r i p t , L a v a l U n i v e r s i t y . STRATHERN, A . J . 1972 One F a t h e r , One B l o o d . L o n d o n : T a v i s t o c k P u b l i c a t i o n s . 1973 K i n s h i p , D e s c e n t , and L o c a l i t y : Some New G u i n e a E x a m p l e s . I n J . GOODY (e d . ) The C h a r a c t e r o f  K i n s h i p . L o n d o n : C a m b r i d g e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . 1977 M e l p a Food Names as an E x p r e s s i o n o f I d e a s on I d e n t i t y a n d ' S u b s t a n c e . J o u r n a l o f t h e P o l y n e s i a n  S o c i e t y , 86: 503-11. 139 TOIT, B.M. du 1964 F i l i a t i o n and a f f i l i a t i o n among t h e Gadsup. Oceania, 35(2):85-95. TURNER, V. 1974 Dramas, Fields, and Metaphors. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press. WAGNER, R. 1967 The Curse of Souw. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1969 Marriage among the Daribi. In R.M. GLASSE & M.J. MEGGITT (eds.) Pigs, Pearlshells and Women. Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: Prentice-Hall. 1974 Are There Social Groups in the New Guinea High-lands? In M. LEAF (ed.) Frontiers of Anthropology. New York: Van Nostrand. 1981 The Invention of Culture. Second Edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. WATSON, J.B. 1965 Loose structure loosely construed: Groupless groupings in Gadsup? Oceania, 35: 267-71. 1970 Society as an organized flow: The Tairora Case. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, 26 (2): 107-24 . WILLIAMS, F.E. 1924 The Natives of the Purari Delta. Territory of Papua, Anthropological Report No. 5. 1925 Plant Emblems among the Orokaiva. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 55 : 405-24. 1928 Orokaiva Magic. London: Oxford University Press. 1930 Orokaiva Society. London: Oxford University Press. 1932 Sex A f f i l i a t i o n and i t s Implications. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Society, 62: 51-81. 1936 Papuans of the Trans-Fly. London: Oxford University Press. 1940 Drama of Orokolo. Oxford at the Clarendon Press. WILLIAMS, R. 1976 Keywords. Glasgow: William Collins Sons. WURM, S.A. (ed.) 19 75, Papuan Languages and the New Guinea L i n g u i s t i c  Scene. P a c i f i c L i n g u i s t i c s , Series C, No. 38. II. Other Orokaiva References BAXTER, M.W.P. 1974 Orokaiva rural-urban contacts and attitudes. In Change and Development in Rural Melanesia. F i f t h Waigani Seminar, National University of Australia CAPELL, A. 1969 The Structure of the Binandere Verb. P a c i f i c L i n g u i s t i c s , Series A, Occasional Papers, no. 18. Papers in New Guinea Linguistics no. 9. CHINNERY, E.W.P. & W.N. BEAVER 1915 Notes on the I n i t i a t i o n Ceremonies of the Koko, Papua. Journal of the Royal Anthropological  Institute, 45: 69-78. CHINNERY, E.W.P. & A.C. HADDEN 1917 Five new Religious cults in B r i t i s h New Guinea. Hibbert Journal, 15: 448-63. CROCOMBE, R.G. 1964 Communal cash cropping among the Orokaiva. New  Guinea Research Unit, 4. DAKEYNE, R.B. 1966a Changes in land use and settlement among the Yega. New Guinea Research Unit, 13. 1966b Co-operatives at Yega. New Guinea Research Unit, HEALEY, A., A. ISOROEMBO, & M. CHITTLEBOROUGH 1969 Preliminary notes on Orokaiva Grammer. P a c i f i c Linguistics Series A, No. 18, Papers in New Guinea Linguistics no. 9. HOWLETT, D. - 1965 The European land settlement scheme at Popondetta. New Guinea Research Unit, 6. IH-I KEARNEY, G.E. 1966 C o g n i t i v e c a p a c i t y among t h e O r o k a i v a . New  G u i n e a R e s e a r c h U n i t , 13. KING, C. 1913 The B a i g o n a C u l t . A n n u a l R e p o r t ( T e r r i t o r y o f Papua) 1911-12: 154-55. 1927 Grammer and D i c t i o n a r y o f t h e B i n a n d e r e L a n g u a g e. Sydney:. D.S. F o r d . MORANWETZ, D. 1968 Land t e n u r e c o n v e r s i o n i n t h e N o r t h e r n D i s t r i c t o f P a p u a . New G u i n e a R e s e a r c h U n i t , 17. NELSON, H.E. 1976 B l a c k , W h i t e and G o l d . C a n b e r r a : A.N.U. P r e s s . OOSTERMEYER, W.J. & J . GRAY 1967 T w e l v e O r o k a i v a T r a d e r s . New G u i n e a R e s e a r c h U n i t , 16. SCHWIMMER, E. 1969 V i r g i n B i r t h . Man, 4 ( 1 ) : 132-33. 1979a R e c i p r o c i t y and S t r u c t u r e : S e m i o t i c a n a l y s i s o f some O r o k a i v a E x c h a n g e D a t a . Man, 14 ( 2 ) : 271-85 . 1979b The S e l f and P r o d u c t . I n S. WALLMAN ( e d . ) The  S o c i a l A n t h r o p o l o g y o f Work. ASA Monograph No. 19- London & New Y o r k : A c a d e m i c P r e s s . WADDELL, E.M. & P.A. KRINKS 1968 The O r g a n i z a t i o n o f P r o d u c t i o n and D i s t r i b u t i o n among t h e O r o k a i v a . New G u i n e a R e s e a r c h U n i t , 24 . WILSON, D. 1969a The B i n a n d e r e Language F a m i l y . P a c i f i c L i n g u i s t i c s S e r i e s A, No. 18, P a p e r s i n New G u i n e a L i n g u i s t i c s No. 9. 1969b Suena Grammer H i g h l i g h t s . P a c i f i c L i n g u i s t i c s , S e r i e s A, No. 18, P a p e r s i n New G u i n e a L i n g u i s t i c s No. 9. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0095033/manifest

Comment

Related Items