"Arts, Faculty of"@en . "Anthropology, Department of"@en . "DSpace"@en . "UBCV"@en . "Campbell, Alastair Fraser"@en . "2011-03-24T00:01:36Z"@en . "1973"@en . "Master of Arts - MA"@en . "University of British Columbia"@en . "Attempts to establish cross-culturally valid definitions\r\nof witchcraft, sorcery and destructive magic are misleading,\r\nsince these phenomena do not constitute true classes, but bear only a family resemblance to each other. Moreover, the attempt to establish such definitions violates the integrity of native categories of thought, and thus obscures\r\nthe understanding of the way in which thought is manifested in actions taken in specific behavioural contexts.\r\nThe understanding of native categories of thought, and of the way in which these are translated into overt behaviour\r\nin specific contexts of action, is conditioned by our prior experience as the members of a particular culture and social system. Our culturally acquired notions of the nature of human society, and of reality more generally, enter into our perception of the characteristics of primitive\r\nsocieties. Particularly difficult for us, coming from a culture in which our notions of rationality are deeply influenced by the subject matter and methods of the natural sciences, is the understanding of behaviour associated with ideas of magic and witchcraft.\r\nA review of the history of anthropological theory indicates\r\na wide variety in approaches towards the understanding\r\nof these phenomena. Thus magic and witchcraft have been variously interpreted as historical survivals from an earlier phase of human social evolution, as manifestations of a particular mentality peculiar to primitives, as an affective\r\nresponse to situations of anxiety, as a mechanism providing for the release of tensions consequent upon life in society, and as a cosmology in terms of which natural and social relationships are ordered.\r\nThe scope of such interpretations has ranged from generalizations made on the basis of a wide range of phenomena,\r\nand aiming at cross-cultural validity, to interpretations\r\nof a restricted set of data from only one culture. It is with interpretations of the latter type that witchcraft\r\nand sorcery become subjects of study in their own right, instead of being subsumed under some theory purporting\r\nto hold true for the entire domain of magic and religion, or even primitive mentality as such.\r\nTylor, Frazer and L\u00CC\u0081\u00C3\u00A9vy-Bruhl may all be regarded as having offered theories of general applicability, in contrast\r\nto Kluckhohn and Evans-Pritchard. (Malinowski stands as an intermediate figure in this respect). But while, from this point of view, Kluckhohn and Evans-Pritchard may be grouped together, their work may nevertheless be contrasted in other respects. Thus, Evans-Pritchard emphasizes the logical coherence and rationality of Zande witchcraft, of which he tries to present the sense, and which he analyses within the framework of a sociologistic and structuralist approach. Kluckhohn, on the other hand, presents Navaho witchcraft as essentially irrational, and as standing in need of an explanation which he provides in terms of a psychologistic and functionalist theory.\r\nImplicit in these anthropological approaches are definite assumptions about the nature of Western science, on the basis of which a number of oppositions have been posed between scientific thought and beliefs of a magico-religious order. An examination of the nature of scientific activity suggests that most of these assumptions are mistaken. By focusing upon the content of scientific thought, and the imagined psychology of the individual scientist, anthropologists\r\nhave overlooked the structural similarities between scientific beliefs and activities, and the beliefs and activities\r\ncharacteristic of magic and witchcraft. As a result,\r\nthey have failed to understand the most important determining\r\ncharacteristic of each - the social context in which such thought operates."@en . "https://circle.library.ubc.ca/rest/handle/2429/32848?expand=metadata"@en . "r ANTHROPOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO THE UNDERSTANDING OP WITCHCRAFT AND SORCERY AN HISTORICAL AND CRITICAL STUDY WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE WORK OF E.E. EVANS-PRITCHARD AND CLYDE KLUCKHOHN by ALASTAIR FRASER CAMPBELL B.A., University of Otago, 1967 Research Associate i n Semiotics, International Centre f o r Semiotics and L i n g u i s t i c s , Urbino, 1972 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n the Department of Anthropology We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA June, 1973 In presenting t h i s thesis i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the Library s h a l l make i t f r e e l y available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of t h i s thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by h i s representatives. It i s understood that copying or publication of t h i s thesis for f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be allowed without my written permission. ( A l a s t a i r F r a s e r Campbell) Department of Anthropology The University of B r i t i s h Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada Date 25 - 5 - 197^ ABSTRACT Attempts to e s t a b l i s h c r o s s - c u l t u r a l l y v a l i d d e f i n i -t i o n s o f w i t c h c r a f t , s o r c e r y and d e s t r u c t i v e magic are mis-l e a d i n g , s i n c e these phenomena do not c o n s t i t u t e true c l a s s e s , but bear only a f a m i l y resemblance to each other. Moreover, the attempt to e s t a b l i s h such d e f i n i t i o n s v i o l a t e s the i n t e g r i t y of n a t i v e c a t e g o r i e s of thought, and thus ob-scures the understanding of the way i n which thought i s manifested i n a c t i o n s taken i n s p e c i f i c behavioural con-t e x t s . The understanding of n a t i v e c a t e g o r i e s of thought, and of the way i n which these are t r a n s l a t e d i n t o overt be-haviour i n s p e c i f i c contexts of a c t i o n , i s conditioned by our p r i o r experience as the members of a p a r t i c u l a r c u l t u r e and s o c i a l system. Our c u l t u r a l l y acquired notions of the nature of human s o c i e t y , and of r e a l i t y more g e n e r a l l y , enter i n t o our p e r c e p t i o n of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of p r i m i -t i v e s o c i e t i e s . P a r t i c u l a r l y d i f f i c u l t f o r us, coming from a c u l t u r e i n which our n o t i o n s of r a t i o n a l i t y are deeply i n f l u e n c e d by the subject matter and methods of the n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s , i s the understanding of behaviour associated w i t h ideas of magic and w i t c h c r a f t . A review of the h i s t o r y of a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l theory i n -d i c a t e s a wide v a r i e t y i n approaches towards the understand-i n g of these phenomena. Thus magic and w i t c h c r a f t have been v a r i o u s l y i n t e r p r e t e d as h i s t o r i c a l s u r v i v a l s from an e a r l i e r phase of human s o c i a l e v o l u t i o n , as manifestations - i i -o f a p a r t i c u l a r m e n t a l i t y p e c u l i a r to p r i m i t i v e s , as an a f -f e c t i v e response to s i t u a t i o n s of a n x i e t y , as a mechanism p r o v i d i n g f o r the r e l e a s e of tensions consequent upon l i f e i n s o c i e t y , and as a cosmology i n terms of which n a t u r a l and s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s are ordered. The scope of such i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s has ranged from g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s made on the b a s i s of a wide range of pheno-mena, and aiming at c r o s s - c u l t u r a l v a l i d i t y , to i n t e r p r e t a -t i o n s of a r e s t r i c t e d s e t of data from only one c u l t u r e . I t i s w i t h i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of the l a t t e r type that w i t c h -c r a f t and sorcery become subjects of study i n t h e i r own r i g h t , i n s t e a d of being subsumed under some theory p u r p o r t -i n g t o h o l d t r u e f o r the e n t i r e domain of magic and r e l i g i o n , or even p r i m i t i v e m e n t a l i t y as such. T y l o r , Frazer and Levy-Bruhl may a l l be regarded as having o f f e r e d t h e o r i e s o f general a p p l i c a b i l i t y , i n con-t r a s t to KLuckhohn and Evans-Pritchard. (Malinowski stands as an intermediate f i g u r e i n t h i s r e s p e c t ) . But w h i l e , from t h i s p o i n t o f view, KLuckhohn and Evans-Pritchard may be grouped together, t h e i r work may nevertheless be contrasted i n other r e s p e c t s . Thus, Evans-Pritchard emphasizes the l o g i c a l coherence and r a t i o n a l i t y of Zande w i t c h c r a f t , of which he t r i e s to present the sense, and which he analyses w i t h i n the framework of a s o c i o l o g i s t i c and s t r u c t u r a l i s t approach. KLuckhohn, on the other hand, presents Navaho w i t c h c r a f t as e s s e n t i a l l y i r r a t i o n a l , and as standing i n need of an explanation which he provides i n terms of a p s y c h o l o g i s t i c and f u n c t i o n a l i s t theory. I m p l i c i t i n these a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l approaches are de-- i i i -f i n i t e assumptions about the nature of Western science, on the b a s i s of which a number of oppositions have been posed between s c i e n t i f i c thought and b e l i e f s of a m a g i c o - r e l i g i o u s order. An examination o f the nature of s c i e n t i f i c a c t i v i t y suggests that most of these assumptions are mistaken. By f o c u s i n g upon the content o f s c i e n t i f i c thought, and the imagined psychology of the i n d i v i d u a l s c i e n t i s t , anthropo-l o g i s t s have overlooked the s t r u c t u r a l s i m i l a r i t i e s between s c i e n t i f i c b e l i e f s and a c t i v i t i e s , and the b e l i e f s and ac-t i v i t i e s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of magic and w i t c h c r a f t . As a r e -s u l t , they have f a i l e d t o understand the most important de-t e r m i n i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of each - the s o c i a l context i n which such thought operates. CONTENTS Abstract . . . . . . . . i I. PROBLEMS OP TERMINOLOGY AND DEFINITION 1 A. Introduction 1 B. How Terminologies Develop 3 C. Magicf Witchcraft and Sorcery. . . 6 D. Terminological Usages 11 E. Resolution of Terminological D i f -f i c u l t i e s 34 Notes and References. . . . . . . . . . . 44 I I . FURTHER METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS 50 A. Introduction 50 B. C u l t u r a l Knowledge as a C u l t u r a l Phenomenon 52 C. Levels of C u l t u r a l Understanding . 53 D. Th e i r Ways of Thinking and Ours. . 59 E. The Importance of History 64 F. The Development of Anthropological Theory 67 G. Evans-Pritchard and Kluckhohn. . . 73 Notes and References 77 I I I . THE PROGRESSIONISTS 82 A. Introduction 82 -V-B. Magic and the Association of Ideas 86 C. Magic, Science and Religion. . . . 91 D. The S t a b i l i t y of Magical B e l i e f . . 95 E. A Critique of Tylor and Prazer . . 96 Notes and References. . 102 IV. LUCIEN LEVY-BRUHL . . . 107 A. Introduction 107 B. The Nature of Primitive Mentality. 113 C. A Critique of Levy-Bruhl 117 Notes and References 123 V. W.H.R. RIVERS 129 A. Introduction 129 B. Medicine, Magic and Religion . . . 129 C. A Critique of Rivers 133 Notes and References 137 VI. AN AFFECTIVE THEORY OF MAGIC 138 A. Introduction \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 138 B. Malinowski \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 s Psychologism 140 C. The Uniformity of Primitive Magic. 142 D. Anxiety and Magic 145 E. Black Magic. . . 152 F. The P o l i t i c o - L e g a l Functions of Sorcery . 154 G. A Critique of Malinowski 156 - v i -Notes and References 166 VII. EVANS-PRITCHARD'S ANALYSIS OP ZANDE WITCHCRAFT. 170 A. Introduction 170 B. Evans-Pritchard\u00E2\u0080\u00A2s Viewpoint. . . . 172 C. Witchcraft Explains Misfortune . . 173 D. Action Against Witchcraft 178 E. The D i r e c t i o n of Witchcraft Accusa-tions 188 F. Scepticism and the V a r i a b i l i t y of Zande B e l i e f s 192 G. The Persistence and S t a b i l i t y of Zande B e l i e f 196 H. A Critique of Evans-Pritchard. . . 207 Notes and References 209 VIII. KLUCKHOHN*S ANALYSIS OF NAVAHO WITCHCRAFT . . . 214 A. Introduction 214 B. The S o c i a l i z a t i o n of Witch B e l i e f s 216 C. \u00E2\u0080\u009Euckhohn*s Functionalism. . . . . 219 D. The Individual Functions of Navaho Witchcraft 220 E. The Soc i a l Functions of Navaho Witchcraft 236 F. The Cost of Navaho Witchcraft. . . 239 G. H i s t o r i c a l Fluctuations i n Witch-c r a f t A c t i v i t y 240 H. A Critique of KLuckhohn 244 Notes and References 248 - v i i -IX. THE IMAGE OF SCIENCE AND THE UNDERSTANDING OF WITCHCRAFT 253 A. Introduction 253 B. The Progressionists 253 C. Malinowski 257 D. E.E. Evans-Pritchard 263 E. Witchcraft and Science as Para-digmatic A c t i v i e s 269 Notes and References 274 Bibliography . . 278 DIAGRAMS 1. Witchcraft and Sorcery as Polar Ideal Types. . . P. 36 2. Family Resemblance and Universal Class P. 40 3* Oppositions Between Science and Magic. . . . . . P. 60 4. Homeopathic and Contagious Magic P. 88 5. Magic, Sorcery and Taboo . . . . . . . . . . . . P. 90 6. Tylor's View of Magic, Science and Religion. . . P. 93 7. Frazer's View of Magic, Science and Religion . . P. 93 CHAPTER ONE PROBLEMS OF TERMINOLOGY AND DEFINITION A. Introduction In t h i s thesis, I propose to examine the gradual de-velopment of some of the approaches which anthropologists have adopted towards the phenomena of witchcraft and sor-cery i n primitive s o c i e t i e s . 1 In doing so, I w i l l place a s p e c i a l emphasis on the work of Clyde Kluckhohn and of E.E. 2 Evans-Pritchard. It i s with these two writers that witch-c r a f t and sorcery become subjects of study i n t h e i r own r i g h t , instead of being regarded as merely p a r t i c u l a r i n -stances of \"sympathetic magic\", the \" p r i n c i p l e of p a r t i -c i p ation\" or primitive man's need fo r a r a t i o n a l i t y - s u b -s t i t u t e . Kluckhohn*s study of the Navaho develops a psycho-f u n c t i o n a l i s t theory of witchcraft and sorcery, p a r t l y deriving from Malinowski*s theory of the a f f e c t i v e nature of magic, but also incorporating c e r t a i n elements of psycho-analytic theory. Evans-Pritchard*s study of the Azande, on the other hand, i s representative of a s t r i c t -l y s o c i o l o g i s t i c approach which we might c a l l s t r u c t u r a l -i s t . ^ i t i s the l a t t e r work which has had the deepest impact on the anthropological profession and especially on B r i t i s h anthropologists, most of whose work on witch-c r a f t and sorcery since the publication of Witchcraft, Oracles and Magic among the Azande must be regarded as -2-an elaboration - and even simple repetition - of themes already present i n Evans-Pritchard*s analysis. In this respect, the Zande study has come to play a role in (British) social anthropology analogous to that ascribed by Thomas S. Kuhn to paradigms i n the natural sciences. Evans-Pritchard*s study, in other words, has provided a community of researchers with a universally recognized achievement providing model problems and solutions; for what has been perceived as constituting a particular con-4 s t e l l a t i o n of phenomena. It i s significant that neither Witchcraft, Oracles and Magic among the Azande nor Navaho Witchcraft attempts a systematic treatment of witchcraft or sorcery i n gener-a l . Both exhibit a s t r i c t l y ethnographic concern, and in this respect are typical of post-Malinowskian and pre-Levi-Straussian anthropology. Indeed, despite the return in recent years of anthropological interest i n problems of an e x p l i c i t l y comparative nature, the analysis of sor-cery and witchcraft has largely continued to remain on the ethnographic l e v e l . There have been a few recent attempts at conscious cross-cultural comparison, but these have been more i n the nature of probes than anything else, and 5 in any case have been atypical. Indeed, the only serious attempt to assemble a l l the available material on witchcraft and sorcery in t r i b a l societies has been that of Lucy Mair.^ Moreover, even Mair*s survey i s mainly i n -tended to serve as a popular introduction to the subject. Consequently, she makes no attempt to impose a general i n -terpretation on her work, and mainly limits herself to a -3-c r i t i c i s m of e x i s t i n g t h e o r i e s . Yet i f we thus have no general theory of w i t c h c r a f t and s o r c e r y i n our possession, what sense can i t make to speak of w i t c h c r a f t and sorcery i n general terms? And i f we say t h a t E v a n s - P r i t c h a r d ' s study of the Azande has come to serve as something l i k e a paradigm i n d i r e c t i n g l a t e r s t u d i e s of w i t c h c r a f t and s o r -c e r y , what i s there about the phenomena of w i t c h c r a f t and s o r c e r y which have been i n v e s t i g a t e d i n these l a t e r s t u d -i e s which makes them amenable to a n a l y s i s i n terms of a model o r i g i n a l l y devised to f i t the f a c t s of a d i f f e r e n t ethnographic context? B. How Terminologies Develop The p r i n c i p a l aim of the a n t h r o p o l o g i s t l i e s i n t r y -i n g to render i n t e l l i g i b l e to the audience f o r whom he w r i t e s - p r i m a r i l y h i s p r o f e s s i o n a l c o l l e a g u e s - the mode of l i f e of the members of another c u l t u r a l group. This t a s k of \" r e n d e r i n g i n t e l l i g i b l e \" i n v o l v e s two e s s e n t i a l components: i . an e x p l i c a t i o n of the conceptual c a t e g o r i e s i n terms of which the people whom he i s s t u d y i n g render e x p l i c i t t h e i r views on the n a t u r a l and s o c i a l o rder, and i i * the determination of the r e l a t i o n s h i p of t h i s concep-7 t u a l system to manifest b e h a v i o r . Thus the a n t h r o p o l o g i s t i s n e c e s s a r i l y r e q u i r e d to attempt the t r a n s l a t i o n of concepts from one i d e a system ( t h a t of the c u l t u r e he s t u d i e s ) i n t o another ( t h a t of h i s c o l l e a g u e s ) . The d i f f i c u l t y posed by t h i s n e c e s s i t y of t r a n s l a t i n g a r i s e s , of course, from the f a c t t h a t the con-cepts which must be t r a n s l a t e d are o f t e n not r e f e r e n t i a l 0 -4-( f o r example, i n r e f e r r i n g to n o t i o n s l i k e goodness, i n -f i n i t y o r t i m e ) , w h i l e those t h a t are r e f e r e n t i a l o f t e n , d i v i d e the worl d o f experience i n d i f f e r e n t ways. Thus i t i s t h a t we f i n d M a i r , i n t r y i n g to render a West A f -r i c a n concept i n E n g l i s h , r e f e r r i n g to the s h r i n e o f a g \" t a l i s m a n - o r f e t i s h , o r god...\". Yet, d e s p i t e d i f f i c u l t i e s o f t h i s s o r t , anthropolof-g i s t s have i n f a c t succeeded i n developing a common s e t of terms f o r communicating i n f o r m a t i o n among themselves concerning the i n s t i t u t i o n s and b e l i e f s o f other peoples. T h i s terminology has been developed roughly as f o l l o w s . I n h i s s t u d i e s o f other c u l t u r e s , the a n t h r o p o l o g i s t has been confro n t e d w i t h i n s t i t u t i o n s and conceptual s t r u c -t u r e s which seem to bear some resemblance - perhaps, f o l -9 l o w i n g W i t t g e n s t e i n , we might say f a m i l y resemblance -to i n s t i t u t i o n s and conceptual s t r u c t u r e s w i t h which he i s f a m i l i a r from h i s own c u l t u r e or from other c u l t u r e s h i s c o l l e a g u e s have s t u d i e d . I n t h i s way, he i s l e d i n t o d e s c r i b i n g these phenomena i n terms t h a t are d e r i v e d from other c u l t u r a l c o n t e x t s , l a b e l l i n g one aspect o f s o c i a l l i f e \"marriage\", another \"taboo\", \"animism 1*, \" g i f t ex-change\", \" i n i t i a t i o n ceremony\" or C h i e f t a i n s h i p \" \u00E2\u0080\u00A2 How-ever, we must keep our guard i n r e l a t i o n to t h i s p r a c -t i c e . For w h i l e i t seems i n e v i t a b l e i f c r o s s - c u l t u r a l comparison i s to proceed - the l o g i c a l a l t e r n a t i v e b e i n g ethnographies w r i t t e n e n t i r e l y i n the n a t i v e language -we must n e v e r t h e l e s s e v e n t u a l l y confront the question o f whether or not these phenomena, a p p a r e n t l y s i m i l a r , are r e a l l y s u f f i c i e n t l y a l i k e t o warrant d e s i g n a t i o n by the -5-same term. Leach's discussion of the d i f f i c u l t i e s of e l u c i d a t -i n g any u n i v e r s a l l y v a l i d d e f i n i t i o n of marriage seems worth mentioning at t h i s point i n order to i l l u s t r a t e the kinds of terminological d i f f i c u l t y anthropologists face. S t a r t i n g from the premise that marriage represents a \"bundle of r i g h t s \" , Leach shows that any attempt to go beyond t h i s formula and seek a u n i v e r s a l l y v a l i d d e f i n i -t i o n of marriage i s i n vain. This i s f o r the reason that marriage may serve, i n d i f f e r i n g s o c i e t i e s , to e s t a b l i s h widely d i f f e r i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p s of r i g h t and o b l i g a t i o n . Leach, f o r example, l i s t s ten examples of such r i g h t s and obligations, and the l i s t could e a s i l y be extended. The important point i s that i n no society does marriage estab-l i s h a l l these r i g h t s and obligations simultaneously: nor, on the other hand, i s there any single one of these r i g h t s and obligations which i s i n v a r i a b l y established i n every known society by marriage. Thus the i n s t i t u t i o n s commonly described as marriage do not by any means a l l have the same l e g a l and s o c i a l concomitants. Hence the anthropolo-g i s t ' s dilemma: i f , i n order to compare the mar i t a l i n s t i -tutions of d i f f e r e n t cultures, he frames a d e f i n i t i o n of marriage drawn from one cu l t u r e , then the mar i t a l i n s t i t u -tions of other cultures w i l l be misdescribed i n terms of that d e f i n i t i o n . On the other hand, the attempt to formu-l a t e a d e f i n i t i o n of marriage which would f i t the f a c t s from every culture equally well would r e s u l t i n a concept so neutral and bare as to be devoid of content and mean-10 mg. - 6 -l e a c h has also attacked anthropologists f o r tending to t r e a t words l i k e \" s i b l i n g \" , \" f i l i a t i o n * ' , \"descent.\" and \" a f f i n i t y \" as absolute t e c h n i c a l terms which can be d i s -tinguished from one another by a p r i o r i reasoning without regard to ethnographic evidence. 1 1 In a s i m i l a r vein, L6vi-Strauss has c a l l e d i n t o question the v a l i d i t y of the concept of totemism. He has argued that t h i s concept rep-resents an improperly constructed semantic f i e l d , i l l e g i -t imately grouping together a complex of customs and be-l i e f s \" a c t u a l l y extremely heterogenous and d i f f i c u l t to 12 i s o l a t e \" . C. Magic. Witchcraft And Sorcery When we consider the d i f f e r e n t customs and b e l i e f s which have \"been described as \"destructive magic\", \"sor-cery\" and \"witchcraft\", we may note also with these pheno-mena a wide d i v e r s i t y i n b e l i e f and p r a c t i c e from one so-c i e t y to another. This d i v e r s i t y has been recognized by anthropologists themselves. Thus Kluckhohn writes that \"Navaho: \u00E2\u0080\u00A2witchcraft* ... must immediately be recognized as a horse of a d i f f e r e n t colour from most Melanesian \u00E2\u0080\u00A2witch-c r a f t s i n that Navaho Switches 1: seldom boast openly of 13 t h e i r power and are not a v a i l a b l e as h i r e d agents\". S i -m i l a r l y , Evans-Pritchard has drawn att e n t i o n to the d i f -ferences between Zande and European conceptions of witch-c r a f t : When a Zande speaks of witchcraft he does not speak of i t as we speak of the weird wit c h c r a f t i n our own h i s t o r y . Witchcraft to him i s a commonplace happening and he seldom -7-passes a day without mentioning i t . ... Unless the reader appreciates that witchcraft i s quite a normal f a c t o r i n the l i f e of the Azande, one to which almost any and every happening may be r e f e r r e d , he w i l l e n t i r e l y misunderstand t h e i r a t t i -tude towards i t . To us witchcraft i s something which haunted and d i s -gusted our credulous f o r e f a t h e r s . But the Zande expects to come across witchcraft at any time of the day or ni g h t . He would be j u s t as s u r p r i s -ed i f he were not brought in t o d a i l y contact with i t as we would be i f confronted by i t s appearance. To him there i s nothing miraculous about it.14 In view of t h i s , i t i s important to d i s t i n g u i s h the magical b e l i e f s and p r a c t i c e s of the Azande from those that might be held and perhaps practiced by a person be-longing to our own c u l t u r e . Moreover, these differences involve f a r more than a matter of mere f a m i l i a r i t y , a l -though i t would be wrong to underestimate the importance even of t h i s . l o r our own culture bestows a d i f f e r e n t meaning on wit c h c r a f t and magic from the Zande. As Peter Winch explains, Concepts of wit c h c r a f t and magic i n our culture, at l e a s t since the ad-vent of C h r i s t i a n i t y , have been pa-r a s i t i c on, and a perversion of other orthodox concepts, both r e l i -gious and, i n c r e a s i n g l y , s c i e n t i f i c . To take an obvious example, you could not understand what was i n -volved i n conducting a Black Mass, unless you were f a m i l i a r with the conduct of a proper Mass.and, there--8-fore, with the whole complex of r e l i -gious ideas from which the Mass draws i t s sense. Neither would you under-stand the r e l a t i o n between these without taking account of the fac t that the Black p r a c t i c e s are rejected as i r r a t i o n a l ( i n the sense proper to r e l i g i o n ) i n the system of b e l i e f s on which these pr a c t i c e s are p a r a s i t i c . 1 5 In the l i g h t of these observations i t becomes s i g n i f i -cant that, i n searching f o r a notion from our own culture with something of the same meaning f o r us that of witch-c r a f t has f o r the Azande, Evans-Pritchard did not select some idea drawn from a r i t u a l or ceremonial context, nor some b e l i e f associated with the lore of Satanism, but i n -stead decided on the f a m i l i a r everyday notion of \"bad l u c k \" . 1 6 Witchcraft, magic and sorcery may therefore vary con-siderably from one society to another, and what i s c a l l e d witchcraft i n one culture may not resemble witchcraft i n another culture so much as some other i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d be-l i e f . The main dimensions along which b e l i e f s and actions r e l a t i n g to witchcraft, magic and sorcery might vary would seem to be the following: i . Content - v a r i a t i o n w i l l occur i n the constituent e l e -ments c o n s t i t u t i n g p a r t i c u l a r t r a d i t i o n s of witchcraft, magic and sorcery. To take some simple examples, among the Azande i t i s believed that witches i n h e r i t t h e i r harmful powers u n i l i n e a l l y , i n the form of a phys i c a l substance; i n Europe t h i s b e l i e f i s absent and notions of witchcraft, are f i r m l y l i n k e d to those concerning a pact with the De v i l ; -9-among the Navaho, on the other hand, both of these b e l i e f s are absent and witchcraft ideas place a heavy emphasis on such practices as f r a t r i c i d e and were-animalism. i i . Meaning - even where i d e n t i c a l or s i m i l a r constituent elements are discovered i n the b e l i e f systems of two d i f -ferent cultures, these can s t i l l not necessarily be equat-ed, since each element derives i t s sense from the sum of i t s r e l a t i o n s with the other elements of the t o t a l con-ceptual system to which i t belongs. Certain types of Navaho witches, f o r example, are believed to p a r t i c i p a t e i n secret nocturnal gatherings. At these gatherings, concerted ac-t i o n against victims i s planned, new members are i n i t i a t e d , cannibalism and sexual intercourse with dead women are practised, and victims are k i l l e d at a distance by r i t u a l 17 means. These gatherings bear a s t r i k i n g resemblance to the European Witches 1 Sabbath, but i t would be wrong to r e -gard them as equivalent on that count. This would be to make a mistake of the kind that Prazer made. For the European Witches* Sabbath has no meaning i n i t s e l f , but only i n the context of the t o t a l demonological ideology and Chr i s t i a n b e l i e f . In the same way, the nocturnal gatherings ascribed to Navaho witches cannot be understood i f they are abstracted from t h e i r c u l t u r a l context, but only i f they are related to the t o t a l i t y of Navaho witch b e l i e f s and, indeed, ,the entire Navaho world-view. i i i . Function - the implications of witchcraft, magic and sorcery f o r the s o c i a l group considered as a perduring un i t , and also for the human i n d i v i d u a l , w i l l vary. For instance, a high proportion of Navaho witchcraft gossip r e --10-f e r s to witches who l i v e i n distant l o c a l i t i e s and are thus r a r e l y or never seen. Feuds invo l v i n g these alleged witches are consequently u n l i k e l y to develop, and Navaho gossip about witches i s therefore f a r less disruptive than i n those s o c i e t i e s , l i k e the Zuni, where such gossip i s centred i n 18 the l o c a l group. To take a somewhat d i f f e r e n t example, Kluckhohn implies that a s i g n i f i c a n t number of witchcraft accusations among the Navaho are made against the wealthy by those of a lower socio-economic status. In t h i s case then, witchcraft b e l i e f operates as something i n the nature of a l e v e l l i n g device, discouraging the undue accumulation of wealth by c e r t a i n i n d i v i d u a l s , since the r i c h man knows that i f he i s stingy with h i s r e l a t i v e s and others, 19 he i s l i k e l y to be spoken of as a witch. In contrast to t h i s , no Zande commoner would dare accuse a prince of p r a c t i s i n g sorcery or of bewitching him, while only occasionally w i l l a poor commoner accuse a wealthy commoner. Moreover, the whole structure of Zande oracle consultation serves to reinforce the status d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n s of Zande society. The King's i s the f i n a l decisive oracle f o r pur-poses of i d e n t i f y i n g witches and the victims of vengeance magic, and no appeal from i t i s recognized or permitted. Since the authority of the King upholds that of the oracle, any Zande who consults the oracle i m p l i c i t l y recognizes the authority of the King. Thus there i s a r e l a t i o n s h i p of r e -, 20 c i p r o c a l support between the authority of King and oracle. Similar v a r i a t i o n s occur on the i n d i v i d u a l l e v e l . Por example, Kluckhohn's argument, that Navaho accounts of witches copulating with dead women provide a channel f o r the release i n fantasy of c e r t a i n c u l t u r a l l y disallowed aber-r a t i o n s o f a s e x u a l n a t u r e , seems p l a u s i b l e . P r o b a b l y a s i m i l a r argument c o u l d be made i n r e l a t i o n t o c e r t a i n a s -p e c t s o f European demonology, b u t would seem d i f f i c u l t t o m a i n t a i n w i t h r e g a r d to the f a c t s o f T r o b r i a n d o r Zande w i t c h c r a f t . C o n s i d e r i n g t h e e x t e n s i v e n e s s o f t h i s range o f pos-s i b l e v a r i a t i o n s , i t becomes o b v i o u s t h a t ; t h e r e a r e g r a v e d i f f i c u l t i e s c o n f r o n t i n g any a n t h r o p o l o g i s t who would a t -tempt t o d e v e l o p a s u i t a b l e t e r m i n o l o g y f o r t h e p u r p o s e s o f c r o s s - c u l t u r a l a n a l y s i s . I t r e m a i n s , however, w o r t h w h i l e e x a m i n i n g t h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s have a t t e m p t -ed t h i s t a s k , and degree o f t h e i r s u c c e s s i n t h i s v e n t u r e . T e r m i n o l o g i c a l Usages Contemporary r e s e a r c h e r s i n t h i s f i e l d employ a s t o c k o f terms u l t i m a t e l y d e r i v e d f r o m s t a n d a r d E n g l i s h u s a g e . I n s t a n d a r d E n g l i s h , t h e s e terms have a range o f meanings t h a t a r e p r i m a r i l y d e s c r i p t i v e o f the f a c t s o f E n g l i s h w i t c h c r a f t and m a g i c a l b e l i e f s . Most o f them e n t e r e d t h e E n g l i s h l a n g u a g e w i t h t h e i r c u r r e n t meanings i n t h e s i x -t e e n t h c e n t u r y . The most i m p o r t a n t o f them a r e l i s t e d be-l o w , w i t h t h e i r most common meanings: M a g i c - t h e b e l i e v e d a r t o f i n f l u e n c i n g the c o u r s e o f e v e n t s by means o f c o m p e l l i n g the i n t e r v e n t i o n o f s p i r i t u a l b e i n g s o r by u s i n g some o t h e r o c c u l t p r i n c i p l e . A synonym f o r s o r c e r y and w i t c h c r a f t . S o r c e r y - t h e p r a c t i c e o f magic o r enchantment; w i t c h c r a f t . S o r c e r e r - t h e p r a c t i t i o n e r o f s o r c e r y ; a m a g i c i a n o r w i -z a r d . W i t c h - a f e m a l e m a g i c i a n ; a s o r c e r e s s ; a term e s p e c i a l l y -12-used to describe a woman i n league with the De v i l or e v i l s p i r i t s . Wizard - a male who practises witchcraft. 22 Warlock - the male equivalent of a witch. I t was from t h i s usage that these terms were at f i r s t incorporated into anthropology. Thus Prazer, while modi-fying the concept of magic i n h i s attempt to define i t s l o g i c (as he understood i t ) , continued to employ the term \"sorcerer\" as equivalent to \"magician\", and to follow the practice of using \"sorcerer\" and \"witch\" as sexually s p e c i -f i c terms. Prazer's use of the terms \"magic\", \"science\" and \" r e l i g i o n \" i s somewhat more complex, since he attmpted a d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of universal v a l i d i t y between these three phenomena. Unfortunately h i s e f f o r t s i n t h i s d i r e c t i o n r e -sulted i n an unacceptable a p r i o r ism. Thus, f o r Prazer, any technique not based on a knowledge of objective condi-tions, and not seeking to operate through the goodwill of s p i r i t u a l intermediaries, was ipso facto magical. The trouble with such an approach i s that i t leads to a group-ing of phenomena i n a manner very d i f f e r e n t from the way i n which the people being studied group them. To take a sim-ple example, among the Navaho menstrual blood i s believed to be sometimes administered i n food as a malicious act. I f we were to define witchcraft and sorcery i n an a p r i o r i fashion along the l i n e s of \"the b e l i e f i n the power of hu-man agents to cause harm and misfortune by the use of mys-t i c a l (non-empirical) means\", then i t i s obvious that we would have to class t h i s act as \"witchcraft\" or \"sorcery\". -13-For while the Navaho consider t h i s action to \"be harmful i n that i t consists i n the administration of a dangerous sub-stance, our own s c i e n t i f i c knowledge leads us to view t h i s b e l i e f as mistaken and therefore as non-objective, mystic and magical. On t h i s basis we would group i t together with such other Navaho b e l i e f s as Frenzy Witchcraft, Disease Witchcraft and Eagle P i t Sorcery, The problem i s that the Navaho do not. As EZLuckhohn explains, Observations of t h i s kind were f r e -quent: \"Women just do that to be mean. I t hurts you a l l r i g h t , but i t i s n * t a witch way,\" My impression i s that my informants f e l t that menstrual blood was i n t r i n s i c a l l y dangerous - there was no need to add \"magical\" proce-dures ,23 I t might therefore appear that the Navaho think of menstrual blood as something i n the nature of what we would c a l l a na t u r a l poison. But even here we must beware of misdescribing t h e i r categories. For some of what we des-cribe as na t u r a l poisons are assimilated by the Navaho to the category of w i t c h c r a f t . Thus, according to the Navaho, when a man i s b i t t e n by a snake, he sickens and dies be-cause of the w i t c h c r a f t the snake holds i n i t s mouth. As a Navaho legend explains i t , Witchery started out under the ground. F i r s t Man, F i r s t Woman and Coyote - these three started i t . A f t e r everybody got above ground F i r s t Woman gave i t out. Snake wanted some too, but h i s mouth was the only place he could put i t . And so h i s b i t e k i l l s you,24 -14-Prazer seems to have been unaware of the problem posed by f a c t s such as these, and i t i s possible f o r us: to apply his; terminology only by d i s t o r t i n g the world-views that t h i s terminology was: intended to help us understand. Perhaps the force of t h i s objection w i l l become c l e a r -er i f we b r i e f l y consider V i l f r e d o Pareto*s d i s t i n c t i o n be-tween l o g i c a l and n o n - l o g i c a l behaviour. Pareto's attempt to c l e a r l y d i s t i n g u i s h the l o g i c a l from the n o n - l o g i c a l -as c r o s s - c u l t u r a l l y v a l i d categories - p a r a l l e l s P r a z e r 1 s d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n between magic, science and r e l i g i o n . It d i f f e r s , however, i n being more systematic and i n being based on more e x p l i c i t c r i t e r i a than those Prazer e l u c i d a t -25 ed. But despite t h i s more systematic nature, Pareto*s d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n encounters similar- d i f f i c u l t i e s to> that of Prazer* s, and i t i s u s e f u l to consider these here-. This- is not a matter of knocking down straw men, since both Prazer* s d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n between magic;, science and r e l i -gion and Pareto's d i s t i n c t i o n between l o g i c a l , and non-logi-c a l behaviour, are representative of methodological presup-positions? which continue to: exercise a deep influence on anthropological thought. Levy-Bruhl's opposition betweem mystic thought and s c i e n t i f i c thought, accepted by Evans-Prit c h a r d , i s an example of t h i s . In Tha Mind and Society, Pareto o u t l i n e s four e r i t e r i a , a l l of which must be s a t i s f i e d i n order f o r an a c t i o n to be considered l o g i c a l . These are: i . the a c t i o n must be end-directed - that i s to say, i t must be performed: by the actor with a. goal i n mind, and with the i n t e n t i o n of achieving that goal; 15-i i , the goal which the actor i s seeking to achieve must he e m p i r i c a l l y i d e n t i f i a b l e ; i i i , the a c t i o n performed must a c t u a l l y tend to produce the r e s u l t which the actor envisages; i v , the actor must have \"good\" (what Pareto describes as \"logico-experimental\") grounds f o r h i s b e l i e f . Conversely, an action may be adjudged non-l o g i c a l according to a number of c r i t e r i a : i , i f the actor performs the action without intending to achieve any r e s u l t by doing so; or i i , i f the end which the actor hopes to achieve by h i s ac-t i o n l i e s outside the f i e l d of observation and experiment and i s therefore \"imaginary\" (Pareto assigns actions aiming at the s a l v a t i o n of the soul to t h i s category); or i i i , i f the end sought i s r e a l , but i s not gained i n the way i n which the actor thinks i t i s ( i n t h i s category, Pareto places magic as well as c e r t a i n a c t i v i t i e s l i k e wage-cutting by businessmen under conditions of free compe-t i t i o n ) ; or i v , i f the action performed a c t u a l l y does tend to produce the r e s u l t the actor i s seeking, but he nevertheless l a c k s logico-experimental grounds f o r thinking so. I t i s important to recognize that Pareto does not r e -gard n o n - l o g i c a l conduct as being the same thing as i l l o g i -c a l conduct, and i n t h i s respect i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note h i s remark to the e f f e c t that a mistake i n engineering could not be regarded as a n o n - l o g i c a l a c t i o n . But what i s the difference between a mistake i n engineering and the er-r o r of a businessman, under conditions of free competition, -16-who thinks that by c u t t i n g h i s employees' wages he w i l l i n -crease h i s p r o f i t s ? Moreover, i s the businessman's mistake r e a l l y comparable to the performance of a magical r i t e ? Or ought i t rather, as Peter Winch suggests, be compared to a mistake i n a magical r i t e ? For while the businessman's mistake i s a p a r t i c u l a r act within the category of business behaviour, magical performances themselves constitute a category of behaviour. As Winch explains, Magic, i n a society i n which i t occurs, plays a p e c u l i a r r o l e of i t s own and i s conducted according to considerations of i t s own. The same i s true of b u s i -ness a c t i v i t y ; but i t i s not true of the kind of misguided business a c t i v i t y to which Pareto r e f e r s , f o r that can only be understood by reference to the aims and nature of business a c t i v i t y i n general.26 I t i s because of Pareto*s f a i l u r e to d i s t i n g u i s h gen-e r a l categories of action from p a r t i c u l a r acts within such categories, that h i s attempt to d i f f e r e n t i a t e n o n - l o g i c a l from i l l o g i c a l behaviour i s so unclear. I l l o g i c a l acts surely involve mistakes i n l o g i c ; non-logical acts f a l l outside the c r i t e r i a of l o g i c . Moreover, t h i s f a i l u r e i s compounded by the f a c t that Pareto was unaware of the f a c t that c r i t e r i a of l o g i c are not given, but a r i s e out of, and are i n t e l l i g i b l e only i n terms of, modes of s o c i a l l i f e . From t h i s i t follows that c r i t e r i a of l o g i c cannot be ap-p l i e d to modes of s o c i a l l i f e as such. Science, f o r exam-ple, i s one such mode and r e l i g i o n i s another. Within each mode, actions may be e i t h e r l o g i c a l or i l l o g i c a l , but n e i -ther science nor r e l i g i o n as such i s e i t h e r l o g i c a l or i l --17-l o g i c a l . Each i s n o n - l o g i c a l , and each has c r i t e r i a of i n -t e l l i g i b i l i t y p e c u l i a r to i t s e l f . I t follows that to try to use the aims and a c t i v i t i e s of one as a means to under-stand the aims and a c t i v i t i e s of the other can only lead to misunderstandings. But i t i s p r e c i s e l y t h i s that Pareto -27 together with Prazer - i s g u i l t y o f . I t i s to Malinowski, more than to any other single w r i t e r , that we owe the i n s i g h t that the c r u c i a l c r i t e r i a f o r d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g the t e c h n i c a l from the magical must be those of the people themselves. Por although Malinowski did not e x p l i c i t l y discuss t h i s c r i t e r i o n , he made use of i t , and that, as Nadel comments, \" i s s t i l l a lesson worth 28 l e a r n i n g \" . Indeed, recognition of the necessity of pro-v i d i n g an account of native categories of thought - and of not imposing h i s own i n an a p r i o r i fashion - permeates Malinowski*s w r i t i n g s . Thus, i n h i s discussion of the Trobriand outlook on myth, Malinowski asks, ...what i s myth to the natives? How do they conceive and define i t ? Have they any l i n e of demarcation between the mythical and actual r e -a l i t y , and i f so, how do they draw t h i s l i n e ? 2 9 Hence, instead of being presented with a set of preconceiv-ed categories - l i k e \"myth\", \"legend\", \" f a i r y t a l e \" or \"fable \" , we are given Trobriand categories, with the near-est E n g l i s h equivalent to them offered as a t r a n s l a t i o n , or an explanation of t h e i r meaning when no near E n g l i s h equi-valent e x i s t s . ^ S i m i l a r l y i n h i s discussion of Trobriand magic, Malinowski did not t r y to provide a seri e s of -18-a p r i o r i categories of supposedly u n i v e r s a l value, but a t -tempted instead to s e l e c t a set of words which best f i t t e d 31 the f a c t s of Trobriand b e l i e f . What, then, were these f a c t s , and what terms did Malinowski s e l e c t to describe them? The Trobrianders conceive of two kinds of p r a c t i t i o n e r of \"black\" magic. These are the bwaga*u, always a male p r a c t i t i o n e r , and the .yoyova, always a female. Of these, the bwaga'u i s the most common and there are u s u a l l y one or two men i n each v i l l a g e who are known and feared as such. But although l e s s common, the yoyova i s considered f a r more deadly than the bwaga'u. For whereas the bwaga'u i s merely the possessor of a powerful form of magic, the yoyova possess a mulukwausi. or disembodied second s e l f , which can f l y through the a i r at w i l l . The power of the bwaga 1u l i e s i n h i s knowledge of s p e l l s . These he may le a r n from h i s father (without pay-ment) or from h i s maternal uncle ( i f a high fee i s p a i d ) . An a r i s t o c r a t may also l e a r n these s p e l l s from an unre-l a t e d commoner, on payment of a suitable f e e. The yoyova, on the other hand, can only very gradually be i n i t i a t e d i n t o her powers. Indeed, since the process of i n i t i a t i o n begins with the c u t t i n g of the u m b i l i c a l cord at b i r t h , only a small c h i l d whose mother h e r s e l f i s a yoyova can become one. This i s not, however, to suggest that the powers of the yoyova are i n any way inherent or i n h e r i t e d . A l l of them derive from magic, which must be spoken at 32 every stage i n the t r a i n i n g of a young yoyova. Special s p e l l s must also be uttered by the yoyova every time she .19 wants to become i n v i s i b l e , to f l y , or to penetrate the darkness and see i f an accident i s happening. The bwaga'u hunts down h i s quarry by p l a c i n g a s p e l l on those places the intended v i c t i m frequents. In t h i s way, the v i c t i m i s confined to bed and immobilized. This gives the bwaga'u the opportunity to creep out to the v i c -t i m ^ hut at night, which he does equipped with herbs over which a s u i t a b l e s p e l l has been uttered. These herbs the bwaga'u attaches to a long s t i c k and attempts to thrust through the thatch wall of the hut, and int o the f i r e over which the v i c t i m w i l l be l y i n g i n an attempt to keep him-s e l f warm. I t i s believed that, should the v i c t i m inhale the fumes of these burning leaves, he w i l l contract a dead-l y disease. In another r i t e the bwaga'u c a r r i e s out, some coconut o i l i s f i r s t b o i l e d i n a small pot. Leaves of various herbs are then soaked i n t h i s o i l and l a t e r are wrapped around a stingaree spine or some other pointed object. An incantation i s chanted over the spine with attached leaves and the bwaga'u hides with i t behind a shrub or house. Then, on s i g h t i n g h i s victim, he thrusts the \"dagger\" he has made i n h i s d i r e c t i o n and v i o l e n t l y turns i t i n the a i r , as i f to stab the vic t i m and twist the spine i n h i s wound. This r i t e i s thought never to f a i l i n k i l l i n g a man, i f 33 properly c a r r i e d out and not countered by another magician. When the yoyova - i n her mulukwausi form - attacks a victim, i t i s believed that she may do so simply by k i c k i n g or h i t t i n g him or her: i l l n e s s r e s u l t s . More dangerously, the mulukwausi may pounce on a vi c t i m and remove h i s or her 20 lungs, heart, brain or tongue. These may be devoured on the spot, or c a r r i e d away to be consumed at some future date. The v i c t i m i s thought c e r t a i n to die i n a r e l a t i v e l y short period of time, unless another yoyova i s paid to search f o r and return the missing parts before they are eaten. The bwaga'u pr a c t i s e s h i s a r t on h i s own behalf, or f o r a f e e . In purchasing h i s services, c h i e f s and men of rank have f i r s t claim and he would not s e l l h i s services to l e s s e r men f o r unjust causes. Among h i s main functions are the safeguarding of the r i g h t s and p r i v i l e g e s of the c h i e f . Thus the bwaga'u w i l l punish d i r e c t breaches of etiquette and ceremony, as we l l as f l a g r a n t offences l i k e adultery with one of a c h i e f ' s wives. The bwaga'u. therefore, a l -though he may sometimes abuse h i s powers, cannot be thought 34 of as a cr i m i n a l but i s a mainstay of the s o c i a l order. In contrast to the bwaga'u. who often t r e a t s h i s spe-c i a l i t y quite openly i n conversations, the r o l e of the yoyova i s never p u b l i c l y donned. Ho woman would ever d i -r e c t l y confess to being a yoyova, even to her husband. But, at the same time, some women are marked as such and even play up to the r o l e . Por supernatural powers are a good source of income and a reputed yoyova w i l l receive g i f t s on the understanding that a p a r t i c u l a r person i s to be inj u r e d i n return f o r them, or i n order to undo the da-mage another yoyova has caused. Her r o l e i s therefore semi-public and the most important yoyova are known hy name. Moreover, according to Malinowski, \"to have such a character would i n no way s p o i l matrimonial chances or do anything hut enhance the s o c i a l status of a woman\"\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Malinowski offered, as E n g l i s h equivalents to the terms bwagaftu and yoyova, the words \"sorcerer\" and \"witch\" r e s p e c t i v e l y . He thus continued the popular E n g l i s h use of these terms i n a sexually s p e c i f i c manner, a p r a c t i c e which i s p e r f e c t l y reasonable when i t i s r e c a l l e d that the Tro-brianders themselves draw a d i s t i n c t i o n between the ma-g i c a l powers of the male bwaga*u and the female yoyova. This usage was also followed by Eeo Fortune i n regard to the i n some respects s i m i l a r material from Dobu,^ but otherwise has not generally been adopted by anthropolo-g i s t s . Another aspect of Malinowski*s terminology has proved more enduring. I t w i l l be noted from the above discussions that Malinowski used the term \"sorcery\" to r e f e r to the whole domain of destructive magic and not only to that part of i t deemed i l l e g i t i m a t e by the members of the s o c i a l group concerned. Oceanianists have continued to employ h i s 37 terminology i n t h i s respect, although some writers (E.M. Berndt and Meggitt) have begun to speak of R e t a l i a t o r y sor-cery\" or \"legitimate sorcery\" i n order to d i f f e r e n t i a t e that branch of destructive magic which constitutes the so-c i a l l y sanctioned redress of a wrong from \" i l l e g i t i m a t e sorcery\", or s o c i a l l y condemned destructive magic. In do-i n g so, these recent writers on Oceania have adopted a d i s -t i n c t i o n long accepted by A f r i c a n s p e c i a l i s t s . Standard A f r i c a n i s t usage derives, of course, from Evans-Pritchard 1s c l a s s i c study of the Azande. I f Malinowski did not render e x p l i c i t the c r i t e r i a he was em-22-ploying i n e s t a b l i s h i n g the categories he di d , Evans-P r i t c h a r d was e x p l i c i t i n emphasizing that he was not in\u00C2\u00BB-terested i n d e f i n i n g w i t c h c r a f t , oracles and magic as \" i d e a l types\" of thought, hut was anxious rather to explain what the Azande themselves understood when they spoke of mangu, soroka and ngua. Thus he wrote, I am not gr e a t l y concerned with the question whether oracles should be c l a s s i f i e d as magic, nor whether the b e l i e f that c h i l d r e n are unlucky who cut t h e i r upper teeth before t h e i r lower i s a form of w i t c h c r a f t ; nor yet whether taboo i s negative magic\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 My aim has been to make a number of E n g l i s h words stand f o r Zande notions and to use the same term only and a l -ways when the same notion i s being discussed* For example, the Zande does not speak of oracles or taboos as ngua, and therefore I do not c a l l them \"magic\".39 Unlike the Trobriand Islanders, the Azande do not make any d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n between the occ u l t powers of male and female. Thus i n contrast to the Trobriand d i s t i n c t i o n be* tween male bwaga'u and female yoyova, the Azande make a d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of a quite d i f f e r e n t order: that between mangu. gbigb i t a ngua and bagbuduma. In t r a n s l a t i o n of these Zande concepts, Evans-Pritchard offered the terms \"witchcraft\", \"sorcery\" and \"vengeance magic\" r e s p e c t i v e l y . In doing so, he abandoned the convention - followed by Malinowski - of using the terms \"sorcerer\" and \"witch\" with a sexual r e f e r e n t , since t h i s r e f e r e n t has no sense i n the context of Zande s o c i e t y . Even more r a d i c a l l y , i n using the term \"witch\" to describe the Zande possessor of mangu, 23-Bvans-Pritchard abandoned the old l i n k between the notions of w i t c h c r a f t and magic. The Azande conceptualize manga as a p h y s i c a l substance found i n the b e l l i e s of i r a mangu (possessors of manguK I t i s us u a l l y described as an oval swelling or sack, of bl a c k i s h or reddish colour, which sometimes contains the seeds of pumpkin and sesame consumed by the i r a mangu i n the gardens. Mangu i s believed to be i n h e r i t e d u n i l i n e a l l y from the parent of the same sex. In other words, a female i r a mangu w i l l pass on mangu to a l l of her daughters but to none of her sons, while a male i r a mangu transmits mangu to a l l of 40 h i s sons but to none of h i s daughters. I r a mangu are believed to show a few external signs of t h e i r c o n d i t i o n . Thus the possession of red eyes, or the i s s u i n g of maggots from a person*s body before b u r i a l , are 41 considered i n d i c a t i v e of mangu. I r a mangu are also thought to have unpleasant p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t s : A s p i t e f u l d i s p o s i t i o n arouses sus-p i c i o n s of w i t c h c r a f t . Glum and i l l -tempered people, those who s u f f e r from some ph y s i c a l deformity, and those who have been mutilated are suspected on account of t h e i r s p i t e * f u l n e s s . Men whose habits are d i r t y , such as those who defecate i n the gardens of others and urinate i n pub-l i c , or who eat without washing t h e i r hands, and eat bad food l i k e t o r t o i s e , toad, and house-rat, are the kind of people who might w e l l bewitch others. The same i s thought of unmannerly people who enter i n t o a man's hut without f i r s t asking h i s permission; \u00E2\u0080\u009424** who cannot disguise t h e i r greed i n the presence of food or beer; who make offensive remarks to t h e i r wives and neighbours and f l i n g i n s u l t s and curses a f t e r them; and so on.* Ir a mangu are held by the Azande to be responsible f o r misfortunes, which they d e l i b e r a t e l y cause to f a l l on people. I t i s important to note that t h e i r method of doing so involves no magical technique (there i s no r i t e , no s p e l l , no use of medicines and no necessary r i t u a l condi-t i o n on the par t of the performer) but rather i s i n the na-ture of a psychic a c t . The i r a mangu i s believed to d i s -patch h i s mbisimo mangu (the s p i r i t of h i s mangu) to accom-p l i s h h i s ends. The mbisimo mangu i s believed to remove part of the s p i r i t of the victim's f l e s h to devour; by so\u00C2\u00AB* doing, i t causes i l l n e s s and death. I r a mangu often combine to a s s i s t each other i n crimes and to f e a s t together. They are believed to be organized i n t o a brotherhood presided over by the oldest and most ex-perienced members. The t r a i n i n g and t u i t i o n of the younger by the older i r a mangu i s thought necessary before a young witch can become strong enough to k i l l h i s neighbours Young c h i l d r e n who are i r a mangu are not considered by the Azande to be dangerous, since t h e i r mangu i s too small to be able to i n j u r e others. I t i s even thought possible f o r a person's mangu to remain inoperative, or n c o o l w , throughout the course of h i s or her l i f e . In t h i s way, i t i s considered possible f o r a man to be an i r a mangu and at the same time a good c i t i z e n , meeting h i s obli g a t i o n s and 44 l i v i n g on good terms with h i s neighbours. For mangu to -25-be dangerous, i t must f i r s t be activated by hatred. As one Zande expressed i t to Evans-Pritchard, hatred springs f i r s t i n the breast and then goes down to the b e l l y to rouse 45 w i t c h c r a f t . Anybody except an a r i s t o c r a t may be an i r a mangu, and almost everyone i s accused, by someone or other at some period of t h e i r l i v e s , of having bewitched t h e i r neigh-bours. Usually however, i t i s only those who make them-selves d i s l i k e d by many of t h e i r neighbours who are often 46 accused of wit c h c r a f t and earn reputations as i r a mangu. Most suspicion i s attached to the aged since i t i s believed that, generally speaking, the older a man grows the more potent h i s mangu becomes and the more v i o l e n t and unscrupu-lous he becomes i n i t s use. Most i r a mangu are believed to eventually f a l l v i c t i m to vengeance magic, sorcery, or the 47 malice of another i r a mangu. Ira mangu are considered by the Azande to be l i k e i r a gbigbita ngua (sorcerers) who p r a c t i s e a variant of ngua (magic) that i s considered both i l l i c i t and immoral. Ir a mangu and i r a gbigbita ngua are seen as being a l i k e \"the enemies of men\", and are therefore placed i n the same moral category. Mangu and gbigbita ngua are together op-posed by and opposed to wene ngua (good magic). But gbigbita ngua i s also conceived by the Azande i n a very d i f f e r e n t way from mangu, i n that i t i s not i n any way de-pendent on an inherent power i n the i r a gbigbita ngua. Rather, i t employs a magical technique and i s a v a i l a b l e to anyone who can secure the r e q u i s i t e medicines and who i s f a m i l i a r with the proper procedure f o r t h e i r u t i l i z a t i o n . -26-The most feared of a l l bad medi-cine, and the one most often c i t e d as cause of sickness i s menzere. It is: probably derived from an arboreal p a r a s i t e . The sorcerer goes by night, generally at f u l l moon, to the home-stead of his^ v i c t i m and places the medicine on i t s threshold, i n the cen-tr e of his; homestead, or i n the path leading to; i t . As he does so he u t -t e r s a s p e l l over i t . It i s said that i f he succeeds i n s l a y i n g h i s enemy he w i l l mourn him by wearing a g i r d l e of bingba grass f o r several days a f t e r h i s death. If the sorcerer neglects; t h i s r i t e he may f a l l s i c k . The g i r -dle would not lead too h i s detection \"because men often mourn f o r a few. days a f t e r the death of distant r e l a t i v e s . Menzere i s so potent a medicine that should any man f o r whom i t i s not intended step over i t he w i l l be i l l f o r a while though he w i l l not d i e . There are many antidotes to menzere and a man who knows these w i l l be sent f o r immediately i f a man suspects, he is; attacked by i t . Menzere i s regard-ed with abhorrence by/ a l l . Azande have always; t o l d me that i n the past those who k i l l e d men with witchcraft were generally allowed to pay compen-sation, but that those who k i l l e d men by sorcery were i n v a r i a b l y put to g death, and probably t h e i r kinsmen a l s o . Other bad medicines include the h a i r s of the ant-bear. A s p e l l i s uttered over these, and they are placed i n a man's beer i n order to slay him. They cause h i s neck and tongue to swell, and i f an antidote i s not quickly adminis-tered, he w i l l d i e . Gbigbita ngua may also a f f e c t the ver-d i c t of the poison oracle, and can break up the family of a -27-49 man. I t i s important to understand that the Azande do not stigmatize gbigbita ngua as bad simply because i t destroys the health and property of others, but because i t f l o u t s moral r u l e s . Wene ngua (good magic) may also be l e t h a l , but i t s t r i k e s only those who have committed a crime. Thus bagbuduma, the vengeance magic used against witches, i s the most destructive yet most honourable of a l l Zande magic. I t acts only against a g u i l t y witch, and i f attempted to be used to k i l l an innocent man out of s p i t e , i t would not only prove i n e f f e c t i v e , but would a c t u a l l y turn against and destroy the magician who sent i t . Such magic operates r e -g u l a r l y and i m p a r t i a l l y i n executing j u s t i c e i n accordance with the moral and l e g a l sanctions of the community. Gbigbita ngua, on the other hand, i s bad medicine, f o r i t does not give judgements, but slays one of the pa r t i e s to a dispute without regard to the merits of the case. I t i s a personal weapon aimed at some i n d i v i d u a l whom the i r a gbigbita ngua d i s l i k e s , but against whom he has no moral or l e g a l case. I t i s used out of spite against men who have broken no law or moral convention. No Zande w i l l confess himself to be an i r a gbigbita ngua, and most do not even l i k e to discuss the matter i n case suspicions be aroused concerning the sources of t h e i r knowledge. Gbigbita ngua must be performed at the dead of night, f o r the i r a gbigbita ngua would be s l a i n i f seen p r a c t i c i n g h i s r i t e s . In t r a n s l a t i n g ngua as \"magic\", gbigbita ngua as \"sorcery\", bagbuduma as \"vengeance magic\" and mangu as -28-\"witchcraft\", Evans-Pritchard was not seeking to devise a terminology of general a p p l i c a b i l i t y to other cultures, but was searching instead only f o r some En g l i s h terms which could be used c o n s i s t e n t l y to r e f e r to what are d i s t i n c t Zande concepts. Nevertheless, despite h i s h e s i t a t i o n i n transcending the f a c t s of Zande ethnography, Evans-P r i t c h a r d ^ terminology can be viewed as suggesting as a conventional usage the term \"witchcraft\" to r e f e r to an i n -h e r i t e d or inherent condition, \"sorcery\" to r e f e r to the a p p l i c a t i o n of magical techniques i n a cr i m i n a l manner and \"vengeance magic\" or \"destructive magic\" to r e f e r to the s o c i a l l y sanctioned use of magic i n order to punish a c r i -minal or protect property. The main impact of Evans-Pritchard's work, however, was not to come u n t i l the period following the end of the Second World War, and thus the terminology he suggested did not f i n d immediate acceptance. Kluckhohn, indeed, seems to have written Navaho Witchcraft without even having read Witchcraft, Oracles and Magic among the Azande. Perhaps because of t h i s , Kluckhohn described a c l a s s of phenomena among the Navaho as \"witchcraft\" which stands f a r c l o s e r to \"sorcery\" i n Evans-Pritchard's use of the term. \"Sorcery\" he also used i n quite a d i f f e r e n t sense from Evans-P r i t c h a r d , to describe a sub-type of w i t c h c r a f t . Yet des-p i t e the differences i n the terminology he adopted, Kluckhohn, l i k e Malinowski and Evans-Pritchard, offered h i s terminology p r i m a r i l y to serve as a set of convenient l a -bels which could serve to approximate i n t r a n s l a t i o n of Navaho terms. He made no attempt to apply a set of precon--29-ceived categories i n an a p r i o r i manner. Kluckhohn used the term \"witchcraft\" (uncapitalized) as a generic category to describe four sub-types of Navaho b e l i e f : those of Witchery, Sorcery, Wizardry and Frenzy Witchcraft ( a l l c a p i t a l i z e d ) . Of these b e l i e f s , Kluckhohn considered the concepts of Witchery and Sorcery to be the most c l o s e l y l i n k e d i n native thought, and to form, t o -gether with Wizardry, a major pattern of a t t r i b u t e s c l e a r l y 50 d i f f e r e n t i a t e d from Frenzy Witchcraft. We may b r i e f l y s p e c ify the content of each of these categories of Navaho thought as follows: i . Witchery i s normally l e a r n t from a grandparent, parent or spouse who i s also a Witch. I n i t i a t i o n requires the k i l l i n g of a close r e l a t i v e , u s u a l l y a s i b l i n g . Witches are believed to be e s p e c i a l l y a c t i v e a t night, and to roam around at great speeds i n the skins of coyotes, bears, owls, wolves, desert foxes and crows. They hold assemblies or \"Sabbaths\" at which they plan concerted actions against victims, i n i t i a t e new members, k i l l victims from a distance by means of r i t u a l i z e d p r a c t i c e s , and p r a c t i s e cannibalism and intercourse with dead women. At these meetings, songs are also sung and dry paintings are made. Some Navahos consider that these paintings represent intended victims and believe that the c h i e f Witch shoots a turquoise bead i n t o each p a i n t i n g by means of a small bow. Witches are also thought to make \"poisons\" from the f l e s h of corpses. These poisons may be dropped i n through the smoke-holes of hogans, placed i n the mouth or nose of a sleeping victim, blown from furrowed s t i c k s i n t o the face of a v i c t i m i n the -30-midst of a large crowd, or administered by means of a c i g a -r e t t e . This leads e i t h e r to sudden f a i n t i n g , l o s s of con-sciousness, lockjaw and a swollen tongue, or else the gra-51 dual wasting away of the v i c t i m . i i . Sorcery i s c l o s e l y r e l a t e d to Witchery i n Navaho thought, and Sorcerers are believed to take p a r t i n the same Sabbaths as those i n which Witches p a r t i c i p a t e . Sor-cery, however, employs a number of techniques p e c u l i a r to i t s e l f . Of these, the casting of s p e l l s i s the most cha-r a c t e r i s t i c . There i s no need f o r the Sorcerer to person-* a l l y encounter h i s v i c t i m . A l l that i s necessary i s that some c l o t h i n g or personal o f f a l , belonging to the vi c t i m , be obtained. This i s then buried together with corpse f l e s h or some other material from a grave, or a l t e r n a t i v e l y i s buried i n a grave, or under a tree which has been struck by l i g h t n i n g . The Sorcerer then r e c i t e s a s p e l l , often s p e c i f y i n g the number of days a f t e r which the v i c t i m i s to d i e . This s p e l l may be chanted, sung, or both chanted and sung. Sometimes a \"good prayer\" may be r e c i t e d backwards as a part of the technique. Other procedures followed by Sorcerers include whispering a s p e l l while stepping over someone, t o r t u r i n g the e f f i g y of a victim, the use of evil*-* wishing sand-paintings s i m i l a r to those Witches employ, scratching the image of a v i c t i m on a stone which i s then concealed i n the victim's home, car or saddle-bag, and the cutting-open of the b e l l y of a toad and the p l a c i n g i n s i d e i t of a charm while repeating a s p e l l . Each Sorcerer i s also believed to have a s p e c i a l power which a s s i s t s him. The earth, the sun, l i g h t n i n g , bears, owls and snakes are -31-a l l examples of these powers. Whirlwinds and some animals, 52 e s p e c i a l l y dogs, are also thought to p r a c t i s e Sorcery. i i i . Wizardry, l i k e Witchery and Sorcery, requires the k i l l i n g of a s i b l i n g or close r e l a t i v e as a p r e r e q u i s i t e to p a r t i c i p a t i o n . In contrast to Witches and Sorcerers, how-ever, Wizards do not p a r t i c i p a t e i n Sabbaths, nor do they become were-animals. P a r t i c u l a r to Wizardry i s the i n t r o -^ection of f o r e i g n objects - p a r t i c l e s of stone, bone, ash, charcoal or q u i l l - i n t o the body of the v i c t i m . This i s generally believed to be accomplished by p l a c i n g such ob-je c t s i n a basket and making i t r i s e through the a i r by i n -cantation, although some Navahos consider that the Wizard does h i s \"shooting\" through a tube, and some consider that he must remove h i s clothes and rub ashes on h i s body before doing t h i s . Emaciation, together with pain i n the area where the m i s s i l e i s lodged, i s us u a l l y considered diagnos-53 t i c of Wizardry. i v . Frenzy Witchcraft remains within the general corpus of Navaho w i t c h c r a f t , i n that i t i s a malevolent a c t i v i t y , d i -rected against the r i c h i n p a r t i c u l a r . I t resembles other forms of Navaho witc h c r a f t i n r e q u i r i n g the k i l l i n g of a s i b l i n g as the p r i c e of i n i t i a t i o n . C h a r a c t e r i s t i c of Frenzy Witchcraft i s the use of s p e c i a l plants, of which datura i s the most prominent. Each plant must be gathered i n a prescribed manner, and each plant has i t s own song. I t may be administered i n food, i n a c i g a r e t t e , or by k i s s -i n g . Frenzy Witchcraft i s associated with love magic, trading and gambling, and may also be used f o r success i n hunting and sa l t - g a t h e r i n g . I t s techniques do not involve -32-the dead and i t s p r a c t i t i o n e r s do not attend Sabbaths or transform themselves i n t o animals. Pear i s u n i v e r s a l l y ex-pressed i n regard to Frenzy Witchcraft, but there i s : no unanimity that i t i s u n q u a l i f i e d l y bad. Some Navahos con-s i d e r that i t may be usedi i n r e l a t i v e l y respectable ways l i k e s e l f - p r o t e c t i o n , or f o r success: i n t r a d i n g or gambling 54 against out-groupers. These categories of Navaho witch b e l i e f are so obvious-l y d i f f e r e n t from those of the Trobrianders and the Azande that i t i s only to be expected that the terminology employ-ed by Kluckhohn i n t r a n s l a t i o n of them should d i f f e r mark-edly from that used by Malinowski or Evans-Pritchard. Moreover, i t i s d i f f i c u l t to believe that these d i f f e r e n c e s would have been any l e s s s u b s t a n t i a l even i f Kluckhohn had been f a m i l i a r with Evans-Pritchard 1 s work, given his? con-cern to understand the Navaho world-view/ rather than a t -tempting to develop broad c r o s s - c u l t u r a l g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s . Our survey of the terminologies employed i n the period be-tween the two world wars; therefore leads us to i d e n t i f y two major features of t e r m i n o l o g i c a l evolution: i . The recognition, i m p l i c i t or e x p l i c i t , of the importance of e l u c i d a t i n g native categories of thought and of the necessity of adapting anthropological terminology to t h i s end. i i . The l a c k of any consistency i n t e r m i n o l o g i c a l conven-t i o n s adopted by d i f f e r e n t w r i t e r s . In the period f o l l o w i n g the Second World War, the s i t -uation with regard to the l a s t of; these facts: has- changed considerably, and of the three d i f f e r e n t sets of terminology -33-adopted by Malinowski, Kluckhohn and Evans-Pritchard, that of Evans-Pritchard has come c l o s e s t to being accepted as standard. This i s f o r a number of reasons. F i r s t l y , Evans-Pritchard's study was of an African people, as have been the overwhelming majority of studies of w i t c h c r a f t and sorcery i n the period f o l l o w i n g the Second World War. Apart from the f a c t that h i s work would therefore tend to be read more c a r e f u l l y by A f r i c a n i s t s than would be the case i f the Azande inhabited Oceania or the Americas, a greater s i m i l a r i t y i n the ethnographic evidence being considered would render h i s terminological system more d i r e c t l y a p p l i -cable. ( I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g , i n t h i s respect, to note the greater influence of Malinowski*s terminological conven-tions among Oceanianists.) A second f a c t o r of some impor-tance i s probably the f a c t that Evans-Pritchard i s a B r i t i s h anthropologist and that most subsequent research on wi t c h c r a f t , sorcery and magic has been c a r r i e d out by B r i t i s h anthropologists. One of the implications of t h i s i s that h i s s o c i o l o g i s t i c approach i s f a r closer to the methodological presuppositions of l a t e r i n v e s t i g a t o r s than i s Kluckhohn*s i n t e r e s t i n personality and c u l t u r e . More-over, i t i s necessary to point out that Malinowski's theo-r e t i c a l w ritings on witchcraft and sorcery are s l i g h t (both i n size and i n substance) and have not exercised a profound influence f o r t h i s reason. Among conscious attempts to standardize and generalize Evans-Pritchard*s terminology, that of Middleton and Winter i s worth noting. Suggesting \"wizardry\" as a generic term to cover both witchcraft and sorcery, they have defined -34-wi t c h c r a f t as being based on a \"mystical and innate power\", and sorcery as a magical ( o b j e c t i v e l y f a l l a c i o u s ) technique 55 p o t e n t i a l l y a v a i l a b l e to anyone. While few anthropolo-g i s t s have accepted t h i s suggestion to use wizardry as a 56 generic term covering both w i t c h c r a f t and sorcery, most have adopted the convention of d i s t i n g u i s h i n g between wit c h c r a f t and sorcery along the l i n e s suggested by 57 Middleton and Winter. Unfortunately, t h i s attempt at a terminological stan-dardization can hardly be described as an u n q u a l i f i e d suc-cess. Por few other s o c i e t i e s have the same notions of witchc r a f t and sorcery as the Azande have. Consequently, the attempt to apply the terminology, o r i g i n a l l y devised to f i t the Zande f a c t s , to other c u l t u r a l contexts has given r i s e to a considerable degree of confusion. Por, even f o r -ulated as broadly as by Middleton and Winter, t h i s termino-logy encounters considerable problems of a p p l i c a t i o n . Thus t r a i t s assigned by one wr i t e r to \"witchcraft\" are assigned by another to \"sorcery\", and Middleton himself writes that among the Lugbara, \"the a b i l i t y , and the wish, to poison people by sorcery may be i n h e r i t e d , e s p e c i a l l y from the mo-58 ther\", E. Resolution of Terminological D i f f i c u l t i e s I t i s not, of course, necessary to conceptualize witchcraft and sorcery as d i s c r e e t categories admitting of no intermediate forms. Rather, one might follow the pro-cedure widely used i n the s o c i a l sciences (whether con-sc i o u s l y or unconsciously) of attempting to construct i d e a l -35-types rather than that of attempting to e s t a b l i s h empiri-c a l l y d e s c r i p t i v e categories of d i r e c t a p p l i c a t i o n . F i r s t systematized by Max Weber, t h i s methodological approach has been suggested as relevant f o r anthropology by W.J. Goode. Goode applies the method, i n the form of oppositions of po-l a r i d e a l types, to t r y and make some sense of the old d i s -t i n c t i o n between magic and r e l i g i o n . He explains that: In i t s a p p l i c a t i o n one accepts the idea that any given magical or r e l i -gious system i s concretely not to be found at e i t h e r extreme, but some-where between the two. This i s , of course, always an approximation, as the a p p l i c a t i o n of any s c i e n t i f i c concept to concrete s i t u a t i o n s w i l l be: the unique s i t u a t i o n or phenome-non r a r e l y , i f ever, equates with the conceptual d e s c r i p t i o n or t h e o r e t i c a l formulation of any science. Further-more, the decision as toward which pole a supernatural system f a l l s re-\u00C2\u00BB quires several c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , each of which i s a variable running be-tween two opposing or a n t i t h e t i c a l forms\u00E2\u0080\u00A259 U t i l i z i n g Goode*s suggestion, we might construct polar i d e a l types, opposing sorcery to w i t c h c r a f t , i n some such manner as i s i l l u s t r a t e d i n Diagram One (next page). I f such a scheme were employed, most of the phenpmena so f a r described i n t h i s chapter could be grouped without d i f f i c u l t y as standing c l o s e r e i t h e r to w i t c h c r a f t or to sorcery. I t would, however, be the sorcery pole which con-formed more c l o s e l y to the empirical data than the witch-c r a f t pole. For example, the Azande believe that witch-- 3 6 -CHARACTERISTIC WITCHCRAFT SORCERY Ac q u i s i t i o n i n h e r i t e d l e a r n t Method innate power magical technique Psychology unconscious & unintentional conscious & i n t e n t i o n a l P o t e n t i a l D i s t r i b u t i o n r e s t r i c t e d u n r e s t r i c t e d Diagram 1. Witchcraft and Sorcery as Polar Ideal Types c r a f t may be conscious and unintentional, but also consider that i t i s us u a l l y conscious and i n t e n t i o n a l . Zande witch c r a f t does not, therefore, exactly coincide with the witc h c r a f t pole of our i d e a l type. Zande sorcery, on the other hand, exactly f i t s our designation of i t i n terms of the i d e a l type. But even although the attempt to construct i d e a l types might seem to o f f e r advantages i n comparison to that of t r y i n g to formulate categories of d i r e c t empirical a p p l i c a -b i l i t y , the construction of polar i d e a l types of witchcraft and sorcery along the l i n e s suggested above nevertheless encounters serious d i f f i c u l t i e s . This i s f o r the reason that any attempt to formulate c r o s s - c u l t u r a l categories on a content basis n e c e s s a r i l y involves a departure from the categories of p a r t i c u l a r s o c i e t i e s and may therefore impede our understanding of these. -37-Por instance, the set of c r i t e r i a used to group a par-t i c u l a r c o n s t e l l a t i o n of phenomena towards one end or the other of the continuum, may not r e a l l y he equivalent. Among the Azande, to take one example, i s the notion that bewitchment may constitute an unconscious and unintentional act as s i g n i f i c a n t as the notions that witchcraft i s i n -herited and constitutes an innate power? Perhaps one might t r y to circumvent t h i s objection by arguing that the c r i t e r i a selected f o r constructing an i d e a l type must be l o g i c a l l y dependent on each other. Thus one might argue that the c r i t e r i a selected f o r defining sorcery i n Diagram 1 (preceding page) are s i g n i f i c a n t i n that i t follows from the f a c t that sorcery employs a magical technique that i t must be learned, that i t s a p p l i c a t i o n must be conscious, and that i t s potential d i s t r i b u t i o n among the population i s unlimited. Against t h i s view, I would argue that l o g i c a l dependencies are s i g n i f i c a n t only i n so f a r as they are actually perceived as being such within the contexts of the p a r t i c u l a r b e l i e f systems con-cerned. D i f f e r e n t peoples w i l l draw d i f f e r e n t conclusions from the same premises, and the same conclusion from d i f -ferent premises. The problem of selecting c r i t e r i a and of determining t h e i r equivalence therefore remains. In many respects, the attempt to construct i d e a l types of magic and sorcery may be compared to Pareto 1s search f o r residues (recurring features i n our observation of human society which provide a s u i t a b l e subject f o r s c i e n t i f i c g e n e r a l i z a t i o n ) . Examples of residues are baptism (the use of water, blood or other substances f o r purposes of r i t u a l -38-or moral p u r i f i c a t i o n ) andi sexual asceticism (the notion that sexual r e l a t i o n s are to be avoided! as being morally or p h y s i c a l l y d e b i l i t a t i n g , or f o r some other reason). The problem i s that phenomena l i k e sexual asceticism and bap-tism - and, f o r that matter, the inheritance of wi t c h c r a f t , or ensorcellment by magical techniques - arer not simply given to our observation, but can be distinguished only through a process of abst r a c t i o n . The common features used to develop such categories as baptism, sexual asceticism, ensorcellment by magical techniques, and the inheritance of wi t c h c r a f t , are derived by analysing them out of the t o t a l systems of ideas from which they derive t h e i r sense. But ideas cannot be torn out of t h e i r context i n t h i s way, since t h e i r meaning i s determined by the r o l e they play i n the system of which they form a part. As Winch remarks, It i s nonsensical to take several systems of ideas, f i n d an element i n each which can be expressed i n the same verba l form, and then claim to have discovered an idea which i s com-mon to a l l systems. This would be l i k e observing that both the A r i s t o -t e l i a n and Ga l i l e a n systems o f me-chanics use a notion of force, and concluding that they therefore make use of the same notion.60 In a d d i t i o n to the problem posed by the f a c t that the t r a i t s selected by the anthropologist f o r the purpose of constructing h i s i d e a l types w i l l have a d i f f e r e n t meaning i n each p a r t i c u l a r society, there i s : also the problem that such c l a s s i f i c a t o r y systems tend to obscure the? relevance of s i t u a t i o n and process. V i c t o r Turner's discussion of the a p p l i c a b i l i t y of Middleton and Winter's; attempted d i f -f e r e n t i a t i o n between witchcraft andl sorcery to the f a c t s