the structure and ecology of individualistic

8/13/2019 The Structure and Ecology of Individualistic

1/28


2/28

SYMMETRICRESPECT AND MEMORATEKNOWLEDGE:THESTRUCTUREAND ECOLOGYOF INDIVIDUALISTICCULTURE1

PETERM. GARDNERINTRODUCTION

HERE ARE clearly manykinds of non-food-producingulturesrepre-sented in the ethnographic literature. Attempts to classify them havetraditionallybeen based upon subsistence echniques (hunter, fisher,gatherer).And, more recently, gross aspects of social structurehave been taken as thecriteriafor differentiation(patrilineal,bilateral;patrilocal,neolocal). However,apart from evolutionaryapproacheswhich tend to depend on rigid unilinealsequencesand simplepolar dichotomies(Steward1955; Service 1962), we havenot yet succeeded n replacingdescriptivewith processual ypology.If we review the most recent comparative tudy of food gatherers2we findthat Service (1962) has utilizeda large numberof criteria n orderto differen-tiate two types of food gatherers.While the index featureis residence,Service'ssampleis polarizedby additionalunrelatedfeatures.His patrilocalpeoples, forexample, exhibit consanguinealkin groups, hierarchicstructuringof statuses,and expressionof overt aggression;his composite-typepeoples are mainly non-cooperativeand non-competitive.Beginning with this dichotomy,Service hassuggestedthat each of the two recurringconstellationsof featuresis associatedwith a differentenvironment,and he has presented hese associationsas a com-prehensiveexplanationof the basic differencesamong food gatherers.Unfor-tunately for his argument,an enlargedsample of food gatherersdemonstratesthat lineal organization (including a unilocal residencerule) varies independ-ently of what Service took to be the constellationof correlatedfeatures. Fur-thermore,Serviceattributedboth flexibleresidenceand the other featuresof hiscompositesocieties to environmentalpressure,whereasit is apparentthat it isnecessaryto distinguish between different kinds of environmentalpressures,

1 Fieldwork leading to this paper was undertakenfrom 1962 to 1964 under a fellowshipgrantedby the Ford Foundation and administeredby the Joint Committee of the Social ScienceResearchCounciland the American Council of Learned Societies.The conclusions,opinions, andother statements are those of the author and not necessarilythose of the Ford Foundation orthe Joint Committee. Several of the ideas were developed under the criticism and stimulationof Louis Dumont, Robert M. Netting, and Arthur J. Rubel. I offer my thanks for theirinsightsand disagreements.2 The term "food gatherers" will be used throughout as a convenient shorthand for"non-food-producingultures."389

VOL.22, 1966


3/28

SOUTHWESTERNJOURNALOF ANTHROPOLOGYsomeof whichaffectresidence hileothersnfluencehe natureof interpersonalrelations.Thispaperwill beconcerned ithdescribingndexplaining commonypeof foodgatheringulture,onewhichhas a socialsystem hatis structurednsucha waythatpeopleavoidbothcooperationndcompetition.his kind ofculture,whichresembleservice's omposite-typen all but residence atterns,mightalso be called ndividualistic,r, usingthetermthathasbeenappliedntheNorthAmericanub-Arctic,atomistic."The termswhichare usedin this paperneed clarification.n an earlierstatement(Gardner1965a) I used the conceptsof interpersonalymmetry(Bateson1935:181)and avoidancef overtaggressionn order o characterizethe culture ype to be described.Now, in order o developa more realisticmodel orthePaliyans f SouthIndia(fieldresearch ithwhom uggestedhepresentheoreticalapproach),hese woconceptswill be combinednddiscussedjointly as symmetricrespect. Symmetricrespect represents he Paliyan concep-tualization f idealsocialrelations.Accordingo this,one shouldavoidbothaggressionhence ompetition)nddependencehence ooperation).Memorateknowledge,nother undamentalonceptor the understandingf Paliyancul-ture, s a term orknowledge hichs held on the idiosyncraticevel,the resultof personalxperiencendindividual nalysis, ather hanbeingderived romgroupopinion rtraditionHonko1965hasused hisconcept, utdidnotpro-videa formaldefinition).ndividualisms another, roaderonceptwhichwillbeused n thispaper. t encompassesothsocal phenomena,uch as Paliyan ym-metricrespect,and ideationalphenomenauch as memorate-level-knowledge.This term is usedwith considerableatitudeof meaning,n keepingwith itsnormal sage.The bodyof the paperwill comprise descriptionf the socialand idea-tionalculture f Paliyans.Thiswillbe followedby a surveyof foodgatherers,and the paperwill concludewith a tentative cological nd psychologicalx-planationf individualisticulture.

THE PALIYANSOFSOUTH INDIATHESUBJECTS

ThePaliyansive onthe lower asternlopeof the hillswhichdivideMadrasfromKerala;hesehills forma 5,000to 8,000foot highspinedown hesouth-ernmost xtremity f India.While they speaka dialectof plainsTamil,thelanguage f the majority f the 30 millionpeopleof MadrasState,Paliyansare physicallydistinct from their Tamil-speakingneighborsof the plains.Their

390


4/28

SYMMETRICRESPECTAND MEMORATEKNOWLEDGEvariousphysical ypes fall within the rangeof South and SoutheastAsianAustraloidypes,formerlyermedNegrito,Malid,Veddid,andproto-Austra-loid. They are physicallymostsimilar o the Semangof Malayaand otherIndiangatherers see especiallyEvans 1937; Fiirer-Haimendorf945:35-37;Schebesta1927; Skeat and Blagden1906. See also Coon 1958:29;Fiirer-Haimendorf1943:17;Olivier1961:274-275; harma1963). Culturally oo,theyresembleheSemang, s wellas the Kadar,Malapandaram,ndChenchuof India.

Today,onlya few of thesome3,000Paliyans re not involvedn contractlabor or agriculture.These few continue n subsistence ursuits,gatheringDioscoreaams, ago,honey,andsmall, lowgame.ThePaliyans reat present,andwere for centuries, nderextreme ressureromeconomicallyxploitativeandsociallydominant lainsTamils (Gardner 965a:76-107).t is correct ocharacterizehemas refugeeswho are still retreating.One should, herefore,bear in mindthat isolated,conservativealiyansdo not necessarily epresentgreaterpristine rimitivityhan theirmoreeconomicallydvancedellows.Thedata for thispaperarederivedromPaliyanswho,although otyetestablishedin intensive xternalabor,arein theprocess f emergingromthe forest.In the sections o follow,Paliyan nterpersonalelationswill be discussedfrom four standpoints: ocialization, on-cooperation,on-competition,ndsocialcontrol;ndividualismn theideationalpherehenwill be examined.

SOCIALIZATIONDuring the firststage of Paliyanchild rearing ndulgence s very prominent.Specifically,f Whiting and Child's five areas of socializationoral, anal,sexual,dependence,ndaggression) re used and if we followtheirscale (1 to7, with7 as indulgent),hePaliyanswouldbegivenratings 6 or7) in all fiveareaswhichare so extremehattheyhave an overallnitial ndulgence eyondthatof anygroup n theWhitingand Childsample WhitingandChild1953:

56-57,69-70,73-74,77-93,98-102,103). Examples f Paliyan ndulgence renotedbelow.The most inappropriateliminationccidents,uch as in a grandparent'sfireplace,rouseno concern.There areno sexualrestraintsn the earlyyears:there s no clothing,no segregationf the sexes,and no punishmentr disap-provalof genital nterest rmanipulation.he childspendsmostof its sleepingandwakinghours n directphysical ontactwithits mother's ody, n the day-timerestingon herleft hipin a sling formed rom herupper aricloth.Themother ivesherbreast o thechildat theslightestwhimper,s oftenas four or

391


5/28

SOUTHWESTERNJOURNALOF ANTHROPOLOGYfive timesan hour.Denial,evenduringhenight,wouldbeinconceivable.hereis a greatamount f maternalwarmth uring heseearlyyears,andmuchcon-cern s expressedor the infant.Outbursts f angerare avertedor appeasedquickly,f possible.The second tageof childrearings one of transition.Coincidingoughlywithweaning t theageof 2 or 21/, the child s putdownmoreoften or evenleft in the villagewith a relativewhile the motherworkselsewhere ll day.Facing ituationswithout ontinuousmaternaluidance ndindulgenceor thefirsttime,the childreceivests firstrealpunishment, mildslap for stealingfood or strikingotherchildren.Duringthis period he mother requently t-tempts o ignoreherchild'sdemands.Whenthe childpresses or attention,tis a commonightto seethe motherbusyherhands, ightenherlips,andaverthereyes.Whenthisoccurs,he childusuallybecomes nraged, riesspasmodi-cally,pulls ts hair,andstampsts feet,whileremainingn a squatting ositionwhichremindsone of the child'spositionand rangeof movements n themother's ip.Sometimest curlsupon ts sideand sobsloudly.A grandmotherorauntmayon occasion ickupthechild n anattempto pacify t, but it willseldombe calmedn less than10 to 20 minutes.Such tantrumsmaycontinueuntilthe child s 4 or5; in onecase heepisodes ersisted ntil 10 yearsof age.The child's ndependenceevelopsairlyrapidly; y age4, the basicsocialrulesare seldomviolated.By 5 yearsof agethechildplaysquietlywithothersandgives heimpressionf beingsocially killedandself-confident.he transi-tionstagehas beenpassedandthe childmovesslowly nto adulthood.Here-after, change s only a matterof degree,for there are no further radicaldiscontinuities.

Independences achieved t different ges n thevarious ehavorialpheres:emotionalndependences reached irst,followedby technologicalkills, andthenby social ndependence. child of 8 or 9 seems o be beyondpunishmentand, n fact, is not under he authority f anyotherperson.Finally,when hethe child s 13 or 14yearsold,there s full independencen economicmatters.The child'sattemptsat independencend self-reliancere reinforced yadultexpectationsnd lack of supervision. 2 or 3 yearold childmayplayon rooftops or withbill hookswithout upervisionromadultrelativeswhoarepresent, nd a 5 yearold mayclimbunwatchedo thetopof a tree.In onecase,whena boy of 9 returnedrom a plantationwith his day'searnings ffood,his5 yearoldsister tarted firewhilehe preparedhe food for cooking.Onlya few instances f parentalupervisionppearn my 18 months' ecordof Paliyan ctivities.

392


6/28

SYMMETRICRESPECTAND MEMORATEKNOWLEDGEThe marked eaturesof childrearing re initialindulgence,harpdiscon-tinuityat theageof 2 or 2/2, especiallys regards ependencendaggressiontraining, ndearlysmoothassumptionf adultrolesafter the turbulentransi-tionalperiod s over.The father s friendlyand warm hroughoutnd,whileotherrelatives o enter hepicture,t is themother'swarmth nd sudden ejec-tionwhich tandout.

PARALLEL,ON-COOPERATIVEEHAVIORNuclearfamiliesconstitutehe only units of Paliyansocietycharacterizedby co-operation.venso, withinthe family,divisionof labor s not marked,andmarriages regardedsa necessity nlyfor thosewhoare unable o provideforthemselves. conspicuousumber f peoplenevermarry ndmany, ven heelderly,ivealone orextended eriods.Normally, owever,hemarital aircon-stitutesthe core of a residentially,exually,procreatively,nd economicallydistinctamily roup.Andthe marital air s the locusof sharingn thesevariousareas.On the otherhand,marriage kalyanam)may involveno sharing, sshownbyoneinstancen whicha couple, houghivingtogether, adexchangedno food n fourmonths.Eachspousehadprovided is or herownfood,thoughbothhadhelped eedthechildren.n a caseof polygamyrpolyandryrwhenthe householdncludesadditionaladult relatives, he exclusivenessf some

aspects f maritalharingmayequallywellbeabsent.Marriages foundeduponegalitarianism,reachof which s grounds orseparation.ndeed, ragile, hort-term arriagesrealmost he ruleas a resultof inevitableonflicts.n the sameway hatmarriageartnershipsrecontinuallyin flux,so alsois villagemembership.f it werenot that a Paliyancouplenor-mally ivesonlyin a village n whichone of the partners asa primaryelativein residence, villageor bandwouldcorrespondo a shapeless, nstructuredaggregationf thosepersonswho aretogether t a giventime.What is more,the nuclear amilies,althoughusuallyrelated,engage n separate, arallelac-tivitiesand areeconomicallyndependentf oneanother xceptn realemergen-cies.Eventhen,onlycertainprimary onds(brother-sister,ister-sister,arent-grown hild)obligea member f one nuclearamily o extendaidto a memberof another.Thereare no kin groupsarger hanthenuclear amilyso that thevillage lacks organizedubunitsotherthan these minimal ocial units. Nocorporateunctionsare associatedwith villagelife, and only marriages ndfunerals relikely o be the focusof shared, illage-widectivity.Therearenoformalizedwaysof uniting,either"democratically"r under eaders,duringtimesof crisis.Forexample, snakehuntingpartyformedwhenthereis an

393


7/28

SOUTHWESTERNJOURNALOF ANTHROPOLOGYalarmnear the villageshows ittle organizationr cohesion.As often as not,the ringof peopleaboutthe snakeis left incomplete,nd it is allowed oescape.The generalack of co-operationn thepracticalpheres not lookeduponas a shortcoming.ather, elf-sufficiencys expected f all, fromyouths o theaged.To fail in thisregards to interferewiththerightsof others. ustas theyseeksocio-economicndependence,he Paliyans lsoavoidclose emotionalies:sexpartnersmeethastilyandwithout ondlingor verbal xpressionsf endear-ment;mothers ermit hemselvesnlytwo yearsunqualifiedttentiono theirchildren; nd,for reasonso be made clear ater,friendshipsre sociallyun-acceptable. hus independencend lackof social nvolvement aybe said tobe of psychologicalswellas social ignificanceothePaliyans.To recapitulate,aliyansworkandlive in parallel ather hanjointfashionand exhibit ittleco-operationutside heirrather oose nuclear amilies.Theyarehesitant o become motionallynvolvedwithothersandequallyreluctantto unite oward racticaloals.There s a verystrong xpectationorautonomy.

AVOIDANCE OF COMPETITIONThe Paliyans are very quick to assert a code of non-violence.As one man

expressed t: "If struckon one side of the face, you turn the other side towardthe attacker."Avoidanceof overt aggression s considered o be their first rule.On a lesserorder,competition n gamesis ruled out. Though the Paliyanshaveborrowed he game of prisoner'sbase from their neighbors,completewith theverbalized"rules," the real rules, which are taken for granted and actuallyfollowed, are quite different.By the Paliyans'actual rules, both the elementsof cooperationand competitionare ruled out; the game becomes,in effect, aballet with as many primadonnasas participants.No one catchesanyone elseand, in fact, no player expressesmuch interestin another'sperformance.

Egalitarianismdescribeswell one aspectof the non-competitive oles withinPaliyan society.While there are personsset off from othersby their status as"headmen"(nattame), statusesare not ranked,and there are no authoritydif-ferencesbetweenany two people other than parent and socially immatureoff-spring. Egalitarianismwith respect to sex, generation,and age is a consciousideal, frequentlyexpressed n discussingkinshipbehavior. Bateson'sconcept ofsymmetrical,as against complementary, oles is most appropriate or labellingthisphenomenon Bateson1935).Balance or equalitymust be maintainedby those who give and those whoreceive.First, donors (of materialgoods, affection,or any other commodity)

394


8/28

SYMMETRICRESPECTAND MEMORATEKNOWLEDGEmust respect others among their kin by avoiding unnecessarypreferencesorpriorities.Excessiveattention to one personis an infringementon the rights ofothers,friendshipbeing seen as a discriminatory r aggressiveact becauseof theundesirablemplicationhat othersare not friends.3

Secondly, recipientsof materialwealth and goodwill feel equal pressure oconform. Social or economic differences must be minimized or denied andPaliyans are self-consciousabout receivinganythingwhich sets them off fromothers.For example,when it was noted that Virappanhad gathered far moresoap nuts than anyoneelse for a forest contractorand would be paid more, hesquirmeduncomfortablyand denied it. Then he smiled,placed his hand on thenextman'sshoulderand in effect said that tomorrow he other manwouldcollectmorethanhe.Disrespect, whether resulting from actual overt aggression or from rolestructuringwhichmerelyhintsat competition,s strictlyprohibited.The Paliyanterm for disrespect s tarakkorava.This can be comparedwith standardTamiltarakkuraivay, rom taram, status, and kuraiv3y,"to diminish,dwindle,be re-duced . .. ," (Burrow and Emeneau 1961: entry 1537) the combined formbeing translatedas "to lower or diminishstatus." The concept is best explainedby a few observedexamples.

Case 1. A youth who was living with his motherand stepfatherhad sexualrelationsfrequentlywith his mother.She becamepregnantand the stepfatherfinallyrealized he situation.An argument nsued.As the offendedparty,the step-fatherleft homefor two weeks.On his return he familyresumed he appearanceof unity;in fact, whenthe youthmoved o a nearbyplantationo locate a job, theentirefamily ollowedhimthere.Case 2. Subbansaw his wife talkingwith anotherman while she was fetchingwater.When Subbanaccusedher of flirtingshe becameangryand spokeroughlyin return.Hurt by her words,he left the villagefor a week.On returningSubbanfound his formerwife still livingwith his parents,but she had been joinedthereby her former over (not the man at the well) and they wereliving as man andwife. As the maritalrealignmentaveno furtherbasis for accusations f disrespect,harmonywasrestored.Case 3. During a time when food was scarce,Old Rajamma alkedangrilyofleavingher husbandbecausehe was particularly ttentiveto his only biologicalgrandchild,makingfrequentgifts of food to the two-year-old.he accusedhim oflackof respect.The old man did not replyto his wife's harshverbalattack lest adefenseof his positionbe furtherevidenceof his partiality,deepening he insult.

3 Normally,moderateemonstrationsf friendshiprepermittedetween rimaryinor betweenecondaryelatives hoare inked flinally,uchas a woman ndherhusband'smotherramanandhissister'susband.

395


9/28

SOUTHWESTERNJOURNALOF ANTHROPOLOGYThese three examplesof disrespectare all rather unusual. They are pre-sented in orderto show that disrespect s given more attentionby the Paliyan

than the variousothersocial breaches eferred o in the aboveaccounts.In manycases, includingthe first two given here, it appearsthat authoritarianbehaviorwhich takes the form of angryadviceis the real basis for chargesof disrespect.This behavioralsomaybe thoughtof as competitive.But whilePaliyanavoidanceof competition s directedexclusivelytoward avoidingdisrespect, t is not theonly form of disrespect.As shown in the precedingsection, lack of self-suffi-ciency is regardedas a breach of the rights of othersand thereforeconstitutesdisrespect.Symmetricrespecthas two components hen, proscribing ompetitionor other acts thought to be aggressiveand disallowingdependence.

SOCIAL CONTROLSocial mechanisms or problemsolving in an individualistic ociety are not

easily discerned.Paliyan premisesprecludeeither superordinatelyadministeredsocial controlsor joint, group-administeredontrols.Within such a framework,thereare,however, ix maincontroldevices.(1) The ideal for Paliyans s that overtaggression r gross disrespect f anyother kind will not occur.The proscriptionf aggressions said by the peopleto

be the rule aboveall otherrules.As notedearlier,children nternalizehis valueatan earlyage. The Paliyansattemptto preventoutbursts f hostilitieswhichhavebeensuppressedr repressed.Consequently,rinkingof alcohol s carefullyavoidedbecause,Paliyans ay, intoxicants ermitthe expression f aggression.To dissipateangera tranquilizers available,he sirupanipu, or laughing lower(whichhas notbeen dentified otanically);hisis crushed n the foreheadby anangeredndividual.Understandably,here is much tensionwhen the rule of symmetric espectcon-flictswith the needsof individualso expressangeror hostility.One notesespeciallythat Paliyanshave an activefantasysphere,particularlynjoying he violentaspectof Tamil-languageilmsanddreaming f poweroverothers.(2) When frictiondoes arise,mature ndividualsrequently tep forwardandtalk to the parties n conflict, oking with them or soothingtheir feelings.Theseare the personscalled"headmen,"f whomtheremay be several n a villageor,in a few villages,none at all. Their role is best described s that of conciliators,reducingrictionbetween ymmetricalomponents f the societywhichare in con-flict. The effortsof the conciliators re acted out without mposition f authorityfromabove, or the headmenhave no mandate o order,arbitrate, r evensuggestmoreappropriateehavior.(3) If, despiteconciliation,onflict s not suppressedr averted, he two partiesmust separate.Separation, s a socialmechanism,s widely used. For example,achild, slapped oo hardby the mother,was removed rom the latter and fed forthe rest of the day by anotherwomanwho was not even a relativeand who had

396


10/28


11/28

SOUTHWESTERNJOURNALOF ANTHROPOLOGYwere recorded.For example,a snake mis-identifiedby a young man was dis-covered o be one of the three ethalvipersof South India.4

Just as Paliyanshave problemswith natural taxonomy, they manifest diffi-culty providingmodels or rules to describesocial practicessuch as residence.They often speak as if generalizing,but their statementsalways reflect whathas happenedmost recentlyin the experientialworld of themselvesor of theirimmediatefamilies.Virtually all of the verbal formulaswhich I elicited fromthem pertain to the culture contact sphere-for example, the verbalizedbutdisregardedrules for prisoner'sbase, and the equally disregardedrules formarriagepreference-which are symbolsof orthopraxy, nd hencerespectability,from the standpoint of the plains Tamils (Gardner 1965a). In the purelyintracommunal ontext there are no formal verbalizedrules except those per-tainingto non-violence.Fieldinvestigation evealed hat informants ackedeitherthe abilityor desireto repeat songs, prayers,or rituals verbatim.I ascertained hat there was notabu on repetition; he informantsprovideda uniqueversion each time becausethey placedno value on a set or traditionalversion.This type of individualismrecurredn otherspheres: herewere no formalizedbodiesof knowledge;greaterrespectwas not accordedthose who had accumulated ore with age (in fact, ofthe manyherbalists n one smallvillage, most werequite young); formal teach-ing did not exist; and traditionalusagesand concernwith precedentsweresub-ordinated to individual,ad hoc, rational decision making. It is worth notingthat Paliyanscommunicatevery little at all times and becomealmost silent bythe age of 40. Verbal, communicativepersons are regardedas abnormalandoften as offensive.Gossip s practicallynon-existent.

Malinowski,half a centuryago, made the distinctionbetweenprivateopinionand social belief (Malinowski1954:237-242).Honko has recentlyrevived theseconcepts,but he uses the terms "memorate" nd "general"belief (Honko 1965:9-10). While these two authorsmerelywished to distinguishdifferentlevels ofknowledge within a given culture, Durkheim once raised some interestingthoughtsaboutthe samephenomena.

Collectiverepresentationsre the result of an immenseco-operation,whichstretches ut not only into spacebut into time as well; to makethem,a multitudeof mindshaveassociated, nitedand combinedheir deasandsentiments;or them,4 Although here s no reasonor all cultures o have the sameor evensimilar axonomicuniverses,Paliyanculturestands out in lackingcolor categories.This and other unusualfeaturesof Paliyanethno-scienceare to be described n detail in a separatepaper.

398


12/28

SYMMETRICRESPECTAND MEMORATEKNOWLEDGElong generationshave accumulatedheir experience nd their knowledge (Durk-heim1915:16).If men did not agreeon these essential deasat everymoment, f they did nothave the sameconception f time, space,cause, number,etc., all contactbetweentheirmindswouldbe impossible,ndwiththat,all life together.Thus societycouldnot abandon he categorieso the free choiceof the individualwithoutabandoningitself (Durkheim1915:17).

Was it not an actual case of this individualismwhich led Levi-Strauss oreport, "I had been looking for a society reduced to its simplest expression.The society of the Nambikwara had been reduced to the point at which Ifoundnothingbut humanbeings" (1961:310).Culture is possible n which the cooperationeadingto conformity s replacedby individualism,n which most knowledge s held on the opinionor memoratelevel, and in which formality and taxonomicprecisionare maximallyidiosyn-craticandminimallyvalued.

SUMMARYANDDISCUSSIONThe main featureof Paliyansocial structurefrom both the Paliyanand anoutsider's iewpoint s symmetric espect.Socialcontroldevicespermit his starklyindividualisticsociety to have order, even though deities must be recruitedto

providean importantpart of the governance.In the section on sorialization twas commented hat childrenare preparedfor their individualismby an earlypush towards autonomyand self-control.The emotional disaffection,as if indistrustof others,whichadult Paliyansmanifesttowardeach otherand outsidersis consonantwith Whiting and Child'sexpectationsn situationsof early,severeaggressiontraining (Whiting and Child 1953:281). Idiosyncratichandling ofthe ideationalsphereis in no less harmonywith the rest of the culture.Giventhe low level of communicationwhich Paliyans achieve becauseof geographicdispersaland populationflux on the one hand, and becauseof mutual disaffec-tion on the other,collation and systematization f the sum of the experiences fthose in a group will be limited severely. Idiosyncraticconceptualizations re-vail for lackof alternatives.The originsof these variousfeaturesof Paliyanculturewill not be discussedin full until cross-cultural videncehas been presented.However, it is relevantto note that the Paliyansare refugeesinhabitinga narrow, nhospitable, horny,dry, stonystrip along the lowerslope of the hills. They are caught betweentwoaggressiveagriculturalpopulationsand are subject to continual bullying, ex-ploitation,and contempt.There is historicalevidenceto support the idea that

399


13/28


14/28

SYMMETRICESPECTND MEMORATENOWLEDGErearinginformationclosely resemblethe Paliyans, whereasthe remainingfourare markedlydifferent. For the most part the available informationpertainsonly to presenceor absenceof initial indulgence,which is only part of the childrearing pattern.For the Sirionowe find indulgence n the areas of cleanliness,elimination,and feeding, with late weaning.There is a familiar lack of both"teaching"and corporalpunishmentand when they have expressedaggressionagainst their children,"mothersalmost always cry . . ." (Holmberg 1950:75-77). The last phenomenonhas often been noted among Paliyans. Holmbergreportsa period of tantrums,and early self-reliance(1950:77-79). The Kaskaare describedsimilarlyas regardsabsenceof authoritarianparentalroles and anearly push towards self-sufficiency (Honigmann 1949:310-311). The othercultureswhichresemblePaliyansare the Yanadi, Semang,Shoshoni and Paiute,Chenchu,and CaribouEskimo. In contrast, the Andamanese,Walbiri, Kaska(based on Honigmann's reconstruction,1954), and Tlingit structureparent-childrelationshipsn a harsher,moreauthoritarianway.

NON-COOPERATIONNon-cooperations expressed n the literature n a numberof ways:by termssuch as social or psychological"atomism"or "intenseindividualism,"by ref-erence to economicallyindependent nuclear families, and by descriptionof

variouspracticessuch as abandoningthe aged or expectingself-relianceevenof the physicallyunfit. With only a few ambiguouscases, our sample breaksdown nto cooperative ndnon-cooperativeultures.The term "atomism"has been applied particularly n the North Americansub-Arctic.Two culturesfrom this region,Kaska (Honigmann 1949:208-209)and Saulteaux (Hallowell 1955:105), have been describedvividly in theseterms. Honigmann uses the concept of atomism in the sense of social andeconomicself-sufficiency, nd Hallowell as centeringon emotionaldisaffection,but one findsboth sortsof atomism n both societies.6Good data are available for the Siriono,who are depicted by Holmberg as

being "intensely" ndividualistic(1950:60). The same peoples characterized sindividualisticusually also have the nuclear family as the basic (if not exclu-sive) economicunit.Most importantfor our purposesare cases which show non-cooperationnthe extreme.Dramaticevidence of a demandfor self-sufficiencys forthcoming6 The phenomena which could be labelled atomistic in Paliyan society, similarly, areboth social and psychological.Taking the concept in its broadest sense, we find atomism ineither or both the social and psychological spheres in a number of the cultures in our sample.

401


15/28

SOUTHWESTERNJOURNALOF ANTHROPOLOGYfrom the Kung,Mbuti, WesternShoshoni,Siriono,and CaribouEskimo.Eskimoevictionof those unable o care for themselves ecauseof incompe-tenceor infirmity Birket-Smith929:1258, 264-265)is well knownbut byno meansunique.The Mbuti,Shoshoni, nd Sirionoalso abandon he aged(Turbull 1961:34-36; teward1938:240;Holmberg1950:85).In curiouslysimilar pisodes, oth the KungandSiriono ailed to respondo the criesofindividualsost nearcamp (Thomas1959:122-123;Holmberg1950:98).Ineach of thesecultures he abandonederson s expectedo look afterhimselfso asnot to interferewiththerightsof others.This is a perfectparallelo oneof the twocomponentsf thePaliyan oncept f symmetricespect.The contrast etween atheringultures uchas theseandotherswhichdohavecooperations very great.Radcliffe-Brown1922:44-47) ndE. H. Man(1882:108,110) have documentedn Andamaneseystemof socialand eco-nomicprivilege or leadersand their wiveswhichamountso a virtualclasssystem."Chiefsand eldersare almost nvariablyuperiorn everyrespect othe restTheyandtheirwivesareat libertyoenjoymmunityrom hedrudgeryincidentalo theirmodeof life, all such actsbeingvoluntarily erformedorthembytheyoungunmarriedersonsivingunder heirheadship"Man1882:109).Radcliffe-Brownhinks hetermchief s toostrongandunderscores an'sfurthertatementhatsubmissiono the chief s voluntary1922:46).Nonethe-less,whether y forceor not, there s a near eisure lass formed.The Veddashavetwo"superior"ndseveral"servile"lanswitha patternof laborobliga-tions similar o thatof the Andamanese.ut in their casethe inferior tatusis hereditary,esented, nd involuntarySeligmann nd Seligmann1911:78-79). An extremes probablyttained mong he CoastalAlaskanEskimoswhomust maintain olidarityand cooperationn order to exploitsea mammals(Weyer1932:176, 25,228). The othercooperativeathering eoplesaretheMurngin,Walbiri,Tlingit,Wintun,andOna.

NON-COMPETITIONThe two main aspects of non-competition,(1) avoidanceof overt aggres-sion and (2) egalitarianism,reusually eportedf present,o thatcomparativedataaregood n thissphere.First,a clear inemaybe drawnbetween eopleswho arenon-aggressivenany context, ncluding elf-defense, nd otherswho engagein externalandinternecine arfare ut seemable to copewithaggressivects within heirowncommunity. earlyhalf of the sampleare alignedwiththe Paliyansn con-

demning ll formsof aggression;he Kadar,Malapandaram,nd Semangac-

402


16/28

SYMMETRICESPECT ND MEMORATENOWLEDGEtually ackweapons.Variousdevices or the safe outletof aggressivempulsesarealsowidelyreported mong he aggression-avoidingeople,as in the casesof the Yanadiand Siriono.The Yanadilove violence n films,whichtheydescriben termsof the violenceportrayed,houghthis maybe irrelevantrincidentalo the plot (Raghaviah 962:13).Both male and femaleSirionohavedrinkingeasts (Holmberg 950:38-39,2) which eadto the ventingof"latentantagonismsnd aggression" Holmberg1950:62).Especiallyn thecaseof menthe accustionsoften lead to fightswhichare, however, trictlylimitedto wrestlingmatches(Holmberg1950:39,62). 'Except at drinkingfeastsantagonismseldomead to violence" Holmberg 950:62)."Aftertheyare overthe participantssuallysuppressheirangry feelingswithina fewdays' ime,andall is normal gain . ." (Holmberg 950:39).There aretwoothernotabledevices or "dissipating"nger;huntingandattackingnanimateobjects (Holmberg1950:50,62). For the Siriono,who are not aggressivetoward utsidersHolmberg 950:51, 2-63), ntra-bandggressions expressedin controlled, stylized, almost ritualistic ways which generally ensure publicsafety.Thereareexplicit eports n condemnationf violence mongmanyofthe peoples n our sample.The Kung,for example,proscribeightingandhave"a pervading read"of anger (Marshall1959:360-361;960:327,336).It is, however,eryoftenleft to the reader o inferthesubtlerproscriptionfinterferenceithorbreach f symmetricespectwhich s widespreadmong hesamepeoples.Egalitarianism,or purposes f thisstudy, ncludes nlythose situationsnwhich he usualcriteria or authority ifferencesuchas age andsex areputaside,withthe singleexception f parent-childifferentiation.t is normalnnon-competitiveultures or status differenceso be minimized nd authorityrelationsavoided.For example,while the CaribouEskimohave no leaders(Birket-Smith929:1260),peoples uchas the Shoshoni,Paiute,and Kung,whodo haveheadmen,efine he rolebystatusalone(Steward 938:242, 46;Marshall1960:344,351-352).In fact, Kungmen are extremelyeluctantobecome eadmen,ustasthey rytoavoidanythinghatsetsthemoff fromothersandwhich"drawsnfavorablettentiono them . ." (Marshall 960:350-351).The Basin-Plateauatherers,ike the Paliyans, reamof powers f leadership;perhapshis sanindexof suppressedesires Steward 938:242).There is markedcontrastbetween he preceding eoplesand those whomakea practice f war.The latteroften havewelldevelopedocialcomplemen-tation:maledominance;irtual ocialclasses, s in thecasesof theAndamaneseand the Veddas (Man 1882:108-110; adcliffe-Brown922:44-47; eligmann

403


17/28

SOUTHWESTERN JOURNAL OF ANTHROPOLOGYand Seligmann 1911:78-79); slavery, as among the Coastal Alaskan Eskimos(Weyer 1932:208); and leaders describedas having "unrestrictedauthority"among the same Eskimos (Weyer 1932:210) and "the powers of dictator"among the Wintun (McKem 1922:243). Likewise contrastingwith the basicidea of symmetricrespect s the notion that groups have primacyover individ-uals, because the individual s no longer a self-sufficientocial entity and groupauthority egitimizescompetitionand social confrontation.This is expressedbythe attitudes of the Walbiri, Ona, and others with regard to revenge whereinjuriesare considered o be against the groups, ratherthan individuals (Meg-gitt 1962:51,97; Cooper1946a:117).

SOCIALCONTROLSAs in the case of socialization,critical materialson social controlsare forthe mostpart not recorded n the ethnographiciterature.We do find, however,a significantnumberof cases in which one or more control devices are men-tioned which eitheragree or contrastwith the Paliyan system. In many of thecultures surveyed self-control is expected and the children are indoctrinated

against aggression.The Yanadi avoid alcoholso as to be able to maintaintheideal of self-control (Raghaviah1962:351, 404). Separationof partiesin con-flict occursamong the Kadar (Ehrenfels1952:71) and among 9 other culturesin the sample. Supernaturalsanctions are important especially among theSaulteauxand the Paiute (Hallowell 1955:103, 105, 120, 147; B. B. Whiting1950:77-80). In the sameway that there are a numberof norm violations (suchas incest) for which the Paliyans have no purely social response apart fromtemporary eave taking, we find "tolerationof incest" or extrememarital "ir-regularity" on record for the Mbuti, Malapandaram, Kung, Paiute, andChenchu (Turnbull 1961:111-114, 118-120; Fiirer-Haimendorf1960:49-50;Luiz 1962:143;Marshall 1957:344;B. B. Whiting 1950:73; Firer-Haimendorf1943:167-173).When an Mbuti allows his wife to flirt and says, "It is not myaffair ..." (Turnbull 1961:125), his predicamentand responsehave a veryPaliyanring.Societieswhichresemble he Paliyansnever have corporalor capital punish-ment as do the contrastingMurngin, Walbiri, or Alaskan Eskimo (Warner1958:70-75; Meggitt 1962:53; Weyer 1932:210). The available materialsstronglysupportthe emergingdivisioninto two types of societiescharacterizedby fundamentallydifferentbasic rules.

404


18/28

SYMMETRICRESPECTAND MEMORATEKNOWLEDGEIDEATIONALATTERNS

Following respectable anthropological (indeed, scientific) principles, butbasing his judgmenton a knowledgeof more formalizedculture, Burling hassaid the following of Bernatzik'sstudy (1951) of the Phi Tong Luang:The Phi Tong Luangweresaid to have no personalnamesand to lack a pronounfor I, so that they could refer to themselves only by a kinship term .... Theirmental level was said to be low: they hardlyrememberedhe past or anticipatedthe future, and they were incapableof abstract hought.Their languagewas sobackwardhat it lackednames or different peciesof plantsor animals.The peopleweresaid to keep to themselves,avoidingcontact with others;yet, mysteriously,they wereable to speakLaotianas well as their own language. Use of the area'sdominant anguage s the situationamongvirtuallyall of the competition- nd co-operation-avoidingeoples.P.M.G.] ApparentlyProfessorBernatzik et eitherhisown theoriesor the racialtheoriespopular n his home-landat that time preventhim frommakinganobjective eport Burling1965:21-22).For those who have worked with such cultures Beratzik's descriptionis in-ternallyconsistentand makes good sense. He would need to have been a mostastute and perceptiveperson in order to distort his data so systematically, fthat is what he did. The Phi Tong Luang representa good exampleof sociallyandideationallyndividualistic ulture.The Shoshoni,Paiute, and Kung,like the Paliyans,are empiricallyorientedand non-traditional Steward 1938:46; Marshall 1960:330). Others share withthe Paliyans an inability or disinclination o repeat myths and songs in a setway: spontaneousvariation is the rule ratherthan memorizedwording amongthe Semang (Schebesta 1927:175-176); brevity and lack of elaborationarethe rule when the Yanadi narrate ncidents (Raghaviah1962:13). Whether ornot these traits are exaggerated n some records,such evidence of memorate-level culture is found in the very societieswhich stress social individualism.

INTERPRETATIONSAND CONCLUSIONSINTERCULTURALRESSUREIn the one dimensionwith which this paperhas beenconcerned(see Gardner1965c for a broader,multi-dimensionalypology), we have been able to differ-entiate two major groupingsof hunting and gatheringcultures. Leaving aside5 cultures to be examinedbelow, the two typological groups consist of: (1)

Paliyans, Kung, Mbuti, Kadar, Malapandaram,Yanadi, Phi Tong Luang,Semang,Kaska (Honigmann 1949), Saulteaux,Western Shoshoni and South-

405


19/28

SOUTHWESTERNJOURNALOF ANTHROPOLOGYem Paiute, Nambikuara, and Siriono; (2) Vedda, Andamanese,Mumgin,Walbiri, Coastal Alaskan Eskimo, Kaska (Honigmann 1954),7 Tlingit, Win-tun, and Ona. This division is congruent with another that could be madebetween (1) societiesunder interculturalpressureor with morepowerful neigh-bors and (2) societies not under pressureeither because of insularity,homo-geneity of interculturalenvironment,or subordinancyof neighbors.The dom-inant neighborsof the formersocietiesare in most cases long present.It mightbe observedalso that while these neighborsare sometimesendowed with exag-geratedmalevolenceby the subordinate ocieties,there is always in fact a realpowerdifference.

TRANSITIONALITUATIONSFivegatheringcultureswhich fall into two groupsmust be treatedseparately.The Chenchu,CaribouEskimo,Northern Shoshoni,and Polar Eskimo on theone hand, and the Yahgan on the other, exhibit differences rom the other cul-tures of the sample. (1) One differencepertainsto their culture,becausefromthe standpointof the typology developedhere, they exhibitinternal inconsisten-cies or representa mixtureof the features of the two culturaltypes described nthe precedingpages. For example,they might have all of the features of sym-metric,individualistic ocietiesexcept aggressionavoidance;or they might haveall the features of cooperatively rganizedsocieties,but stressaggressionavoid-

ance. Four of the exceptional asesexemplify he formerof thesepossibilities;heYahgan are an exampleof the latter. (2) Anotherdifferencepertains o environ-ment, all five peoples being in transitionalor recently transitionalsituations.Again, the first four cases aresimilar; heyhave recentlyachievedcultural homo-geneity,eitherbecauseof the introductionof guns or horses,or as a resultof mi-gration.The Yahgan,by contrast,wereunder ncreasingpressure rom the betterarmed and strongerOna (Lothrop1928:87, 193; Bird 1946:21; Cooper 1946b:131). It can be shownthat the mixturesof culturalfeatures are preciselythosewhichwouldbe expectedundersuch transitional nvironmentalituations (Gard-ner 1965a:132-137;1965c).

THE QUESTIONOFCAUSALITYIf interculturalpressureis the cause of non-cooperative,non-competitivesocialstructureand of individualism n the ideationalsphere,the autsalmechan-ism requires xplanation.The individualistic ultureshave child rearingpractices7 The differentlassificationf the two accountsf the Kaska eflectshe significantdifferencesn the culture s describedn theethnographicresentndas seen hroughthno-historicalreconstruction.

406


20/28

SYMMETRICRESPECTAND MEMORATEKNOWLEDGElikethoseof thePaliyans.Although his doesnot takeus veryfar towards x-plainingultimate auses, t suggests he possibility f a psychologicalariableinterveningetweennterculturalressurendculturalesponse.Psychoanalyticndanthropologicalritingsoffera number f possible x-planationsf individual ehaviorimilaro thatexpressed y whole ocieties frefugee oodgatherers. epression,eneralizationf anxiety, rojection,nddis-placementrethe ndividualrocessesf mostobvious elevance.The problems resented y continual rustration re described y Good-enough:

We areconstrainedycircumstancesndotherpeople, like, o developwaysofcomingo termswithourfrustrationsnddeprivations.e haveto learn o livewith,and n spiteof, themwithout ver ndulgencen temperantrumsr expres-sionsof self-pity. urthermore,nsofar s we feel angerandarefrustratedn thisrespect,oo,wehave o learn o dealwiththese eelingsn sociallyhere ntercul-turally .M.G.]acceptableaysaswell(Goodenough963:112).Whenwe areafraid o allow urselvesheprivilegef letting o atall (whetherwearerealisticn our fear or not), wemaytotally uppressll expressionf theemotionn questionndbecomehroughelf-censorshipncapablef exhibitingtevenwhen t is expectedf us. When such s the casewe saywe are'repressed'(Goodenough963:114-115).

KarenHomeycontributeseveralhoughts bout he effectsof hostility e-pressionwhichwouldaccountor a significantartof theresponsef a peopleto continual arassment.irst,repressing ostilitynsteadof retaliatingeads oa cycle,because t constitutes n invitation or furtheraggression Homey1937:63).Second,repressed ostilitymay createanxiety.Protectionagainstanxiety,Homeysuggests,maytake fourforms, woof which-withdrawalndsubmission-areignificantor understandingefugeegatheringpeoples.Thewithdrawnersonseeks for independenceither hroughpossessionsr by re-stricting isneeds o a minimumHomey1937:98-99).The submissiveersoncomplieswithexpectationsn order obe thought"good"; is owndemands rerepressedo avoidresentmentHomey1937:96-98).Third,repressed ostilitymay eadto a fearof successn competition,nd anurge o be conventionalndto avoidenvy (Homey 1937:210, 213-214).In a laterworkHomeydiscusseshe"moving wayperson," honeedsemo-tionaldistanceand self-sufficiency.his varietyof neuroticadjustment ftenentails everal atternsamiliar mong efugeegatherers.he moving wayper-son avoids ong termcommitments;e conforms utwardlywhile nwardly e-jectingrulesand standards,onsiders dviceto be domination,njoyssexualrelationships f they are transitory and compartmentalized not constituting

407


21/28

SOUTHWESTERNJOURNALOF ANTHROPOLOGY"trespass" gainst him), and will not admitto his inner conflicts (Homey 1945:75, 78, 85-86, 93). While withdrawal"doesnot meangoing into a desert . . ."(Homey 1937:98), the movingaway person"is like the Pygmiesof Ceylon, in-vincible so long as they hide in the forest but easily beatenwhen they emerge"(Homey 1945:92).Many featuresof the culture of gatherersunder interculturalpressuresug-gest the samemotivationalpatternas neuroticpersonswhomHorney describes:the fear among Paliyansand Yanadis that alcohol will permit aggression,thefear of anger among the Kung, unrealisticdenial of known aggressiveout-bursts,avoidanceof competitionand status differences,outwardlyconformingbehavior n the context of culturecontact,emotionalaloofness n sexualrelation-ships,andso on. Homey's moving away type is non-cooperative,on-competitive,independent, ut outwardly onformist.Generalizationof anxietyis attestedby both Plant (1937:84) and Homey(1937:89), and this "familiarpsychologicalprinciple" s lent greatertenabilityby the findingsof Whiting and Child (1953:265, 282). This processcould beconsideredauxiliary-it does not explain the whole range of phenomena n re-fugee culturesbut it accountsfor the general insecuritywith regardto "otherpersons,"whetheror not particularclasses of people are perceivedas threats.Certainpersonsare threatening,of course,notably the inconsistentmotherandoutsiders.Projectionand displacement,as explanatoryprinciples,appear to have thesame limitationsas generalizationof anxiety. They account better for certainphenomenawithin the culturalsystemthan for the relationshipbetweenexternalfactorsand the culturalsystem,and are most appropriate or understandinghelinks between child rearing and adult behavior.But projectionof repressedhostilityagainst outsidersand displacementof aggression elt towardsfrustrat-ing parents o outsiderswouldexplainwhy manyrefugees,especially he Siriono,Saulteaux,and Kaska,have an exaggerated ear of their morepowerful neigh-bors, endowing them with the characterof totally malevolent,almost super-naturalforces.

It is suggestedthat repression f hostilityis the mainprocesswhichaccountsfor the individualistic ulturalpatterningof refugee food gatherers,with gen-eralizationof anxiety,projection,and displacementas secondarybut supportingprocesses.Subject to chronicdomination,these refugee peoples have defendedthemselvesby withdrawingemotionallyand geographically.That is, they with-drawwhenpossibleand are submissivewhencontactis inevitable.Under circum-stanceswhichcall for greatmobility,self-sufficiencys of distinctadaptivevalue.If it were not for the transitionalcases in the sample,one might supposethat

408


22/28

SYMMETRICRESPECTAND MEMORATEKNOWLEDGEthe causalsequencewas the exact opposite.A culturewhich had developedso-calization practices eadingto non-cooperative,on-competitive ehaviorpatternswould be extraordinarilyvulnerable to outsiders who arrived with a moretightly knit society. Thus refugee status and interculturalpower differenceswould be the result,not the cause,of individualism.But unless the transitionalcases have been misinterpretedhis would not be a tenable alternativeexplana-tion of the datareviewed.One might proposethat the memoratepattern of knowledgeis a result ofthe psychologicaland sociologicalsituation. Given small, dispersedpopulationaggregateswith a low level of communication, ot only betweengroupsbut alsoamong co-members, here will be severe limits to the degree of generalizationabout experiencewhichcan be achieved;as a result, therewill be relianceuponan idiosyncratic rderingof reality.

A BROADERRAMEWORKFCAUSALITYDespite the apparentlygood fit betweensituations of interculturalpressureand individualistic ulture,amongfood gatherers here are otherpossiblecausesof the interveningvariable of psychological ndividualism.John Whiting has

suggestedthat the external force which startsa particular ocialization-culture--socialization cycle could be a sudden change in the socializationsituationasa consequence f factorsdisturbing he make-upand functioningof the nuclearfamily (Whiting 1965). For this reason, t would be wise to qualify our expla-nationby saying that, in the culture of manyhuntersand gatherers, he psycho-logicalvariable ikelyreflects nterculturalpressure.

EXTREMENDIVIDUALISMThe veryextreme ndividualism ound amongfood gatheringtribescontrastswith the lesser individualismof so-called individualisticcomplexsocieties.Thiscan be explainedby the difference n permissiveness f environments.Huntersand gatherersare far moremobileand can disperse n order to avoid difficulty.Gatherersare able to use separationof parties in conflict as a major controldevice, one difficult to imagine in the cultures of economicallymore complex,

sedentarypeoples.A simple gathering economy provides less basis for differencesin controlover resourcesand less need for cooperation han is entailed in the food-pro-ducer'ssocio-economicystem,with its markeddivisionof laborand occupationalspecialization.Thus egalitarian deals are morerealisticfor food-gatherers romthe economic tandpoint.

409


23/28

SOUTHWESTERN JOURNAL OF ANTHROPOLOGYSUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The Paliyansof South Indiahavea socialstructurewhich s baseduponnon-competitionndnon-cooperation,nd a culturewhich s charactetisticallyindividualisticnother pheress well.Amonghunters ndgathererslsewherenAsia, n Africa,and n NorthandSouthAmericahereare othercultureswhichexhibithe same eatures s Pali-yanculture.The parallels reremarkablyloseandare foundamong ociallydiverse thebilateral aliyans,atrilinealaulteaux,ndmatrilineal aska)andeconomicallyiverse Paliyan atherers,Kunghunters, ndYahgan hellfish-ers) non-foodproducers.n all of thesecasesa recurringonstellationf sys-tematicallynterrelatedulturaleaturesmaybe discerned.Featuresuchas abandoningheaged,"toleration"f incest, ackof leader-ship, ndividualism,ndmemorate-levelultureare no longer o be seenas ex-ceptions equiringndividualndparticular xplanations.hey areintegral s-pectsof the internally onsistent ulture ypeof whichPaliyanculture s anexample.A smallsample uggestsan associationetween nterculturalressure ndindividualisticulture.The psychologicalesponseo interculturalressuresheldto be of importances an interveningariablen the developmentf in-dividualisticulture,raising he furtherquestion f whatotherenvironmentalsituationsould ead o thesamepsychologicalndculturalesponse.

BIBLIOGRAYAIYAPPAN, A.1948 Reporton theSocio-Economiconditions f theAboriginalTribesof theProvince f Madras.Madras:Government ress.BAILEY,J.1863 An Accountof the Wild Tribesof the Veddahsof Ceylon: heirHabits,Customs, nd Superstitions. ransactionsf the Ethnological ocietyof

London :278-320.BATESON,G.1935 CultureContact ndSchismogenesis. an35:art.199,178-183.BERNATZIK,H. A.1951 TheSpirits f theYellowLeaves.London:Robertale.BIRD,J.1946 The Archaeology f Patagonia.Bureauof AmericanEthnology,bulle-tin 143, 1:17-24.BIRKET-SMITH, .1929 The CaribouEskimos:Materialand SocialLife and theirCulturalPosi-tion.Copenhagen:Gyldeddanskeoghandel.

410


24/28

SYMMETRICESPECT ND MEMORATENOWLEDGEBURLING,.1965 Hill Farmsand Padi Fields:Life in MainlandSoutheastAsia. Engle-woodCliffs:Prentice-Hall.BURROW,., ANDM. B. EMENEAU1961 A DravidianEtymological ictionary.Oxford:Clarendonress.CALLENDER,.1962 SocialOrganization f the CentralAlgonkian ndians.MilwaukeePub-licMuseumPublicationsn Anthropology.COON,C. S.1958 An Anthropological xcursionAround he World. HumanBiology30:29-42.COOPER,. M.1946aThe Ona. Bureau f AmericanEthnology, ulletin143,1:107-125.

1946bThe Patagonian ndPampeanHunters.Bureauof AmericanEthnology,bulletin143,1:127-168.1946c The Yahgan.Bureau f AmericanEthnology, ulletin143,1:81-106.DUNNING,. W.1959 Social and EconomicChangeamong the NorthernOjibwa.Toronto:Universityof TorontoPress.DURKHEIM,.1915 The ElementaryFormsof the ReligiousLife. Trans.by J. W. Swain.London:GeorgeAllen and Unwin.EHRENFELS,U. R.1952 Kadarof Cochin.Madras:Universityf MadrasPress.EVANS,I. H. N.1937 TheNegritosof Malaya.Cambridge:Universityress.FORDE,C. D.1934 Habitat, Economyand Society:a Geographical ntroduction o Eth-nology.New York:E.P. Dutton.FURER-HAIMENDORF,. von1943 The Chenchus:ungleFolkof theDeccan.London:Macmillan.1945 The Reddisof the Bison Hills: a Study in Acculturation.London:Macmillan.1960 Notes on the Malapandaramf Travancore.Bulletinof the Interna-

tionalCommittee n Urgent Anthropologicalnd EthnologicalResearch3:45-51.GARDNER,. M.1965aEcologyand SocialStructure n RefugeePopulations:he PaliyansofSouth India. UnpublishedPh.D. dissertation,Universityof Pennsyl-vania, Philadelphia,Pennsylvania. Also, UniversityMicrofilms,AnnArbor,Michigan.)1965bPaliyanSocialStructure.Paperpresentedat the National MuseumofCanadaConference n Band Organization.National Museumof Can-ada Bulletin(inpress).

411


25/28

SOUTHWESTERNJOURNALOF ANTHROPOLOGY1965cTotal EcologicalSituationand a Reclassificationf Food GatheringPeoples.Paper presentedat the AmericanAnthropological ssociationAnnualMeeting,Denver,Colorado.GOLDSCHMIDT,.1948 SocialOrganizationn NativeCalifornia nd the Originof Clans.Amer-icanAnthropologist0:444-456.

GOODENOUGH, W. H.1963 Cooperationn Change.New York:RussellageFoundation.GUSINDE, M.1942 Die Kongo-Pygmaenn Geschichteund Gegenwart.Nova Acta Leo-poldina,N.F. 11:76,Halle (Saale).1961 The Yamana:The Life and Thought of the WaterNomadsof CapeHorn. Trans.by F. Schutze.New Haven:HumanRelationsArea Files.HALLOWELL, A. I.1955 Culture ndExperience.hiladelphia:Universityf Pennsylvaniaress.HOLMBERG, A. R.1950 Nomadsof the Long Bow. Smithsoniannstitution, nstituteof SocialAnthropology,ublication 0.HONIGMANN, J. J.1949 Cultureand Ethos of KaskaSociety.Yale UniversityPublicationsnAnthropology0.1954 The KaskaIndians:an EthnographicReconstruction. ale UniversityPublicationsnAnthropology1.1960 "CircumpolarorestNorth Americaas a Moder CultureArea,"inMen and Cultures;SelectedPapers Fifth InternationalCongressofAnthropologicalnd EthnologicalSciences,Philadelphia, 956 (ed. byA. F. C. Wallace), pp. 447-451.Philadelphia:Universityof Pennsyl-vaniaPress.HONKO, L.1965 Memorates ndthe Studyof FolkBeliefs.Journalof the Folklore nsti-tute1:5-19.HORNEY, K.1937 The NeuroticPersonalityf Our Time.New York:W. W. Norton.1945 Our InnerConflicts: Constructive heoryof Neurosis.New York: W.

W. Norton.KRAUSE,A.1956 The TlingitIndians.Trans.byE. Gunther. eattle:Universityof Wash-ingtonPress.LANDES, R.1937 "TheOjibwaof Canada,"n CooperationndCompetitionmongPrim-itivePeoples(ed. by M. Mead), pp. 87-126.Boston:BeaconPress.LANTIS, M.1946 The SocialCulture f the NunivakEskimo.Transactionsf the Ameri-canPhilosophicalociety35 (3):153-323.

412


26/28

SYMMETRICESPECT ND MEMORATENOWLEDGELARSEN,H., ANDF. RAINEY1948 Ipiutakandthe Arctic WhaleHuntingCulture.Anthropological apersof theAmericanMuseumof NaturalHistory42.LEVI-STRAUSS, .1961 A Worldon the Wane.Trans.byJ. Russell.New York:Criterion.LOTHROP, S. K.1928 The Indiansof Tierradel Fuego.New York: Museumof the Ameri-canIndian.LuIZ,A. A. D.1962 Tribesof Kerala.New Delhi:BharatiyaAdimjatiSevakSangh.MALINOWSKI,B.1954 Magic,Science, ndReligion.GardenCity:DoubledayndCompany.MAN, E. H.

1882 On the Aboriginal nhabitants f the AndamanIslands,Part 1. TheJournalof the Anthropologicalnstituteof GreatBritainand Ireland12:69-116.MARSHALL,L.1957 The KinTerminology ystemof the KungBushmen.Africa27:1-25.1959 Marriage mong KungBushmen.Africa29:335-365.1960 KungBushmanBands.Africa30:325-355.1961 Sharing,Talking,and Giving:Relief of SocialTensionsamong KungBushmen.Africa31:231-249.MCKERN, W. C.

1922 FunctionalFamilies f the Patwin.University f California, ublicationsin AmericanArchaeologyndEthnology, ol. 13,no. 17:235-258.MEGGITT, M. J.1962 DesertPeople:a Study of the WalbiriAborigines f CentralAustralia.Sydney:AngusndRobertson.OLIVER,S. C.1962 Ecologyand CulturalContinuityas Contributing actors n the SocialOrganization f the Plains Indians.Universityof California,Publica-tionsin AmericanArchaeology ndEthnology, ol. 48, no. 1.OVIER, G.

1961 Anthropologiedes Tamouls du Sud de PInde. Paris:fcole Fran;aised'Extreme-Orient.PLANT,. S.1937 Personality nd the CulturalPattern.New York:The CommonwealthFund.PUTNAM, P.1948 "The Pygmiesof the Ituri Forest," n A Reader n GeneralAnthro-pology (ed. by C. S. Coon), pp. 322-342.New York:HenryHolt.RADCLIFFE-BROWN,. R.1922 The Andamanslanders.Cambridge:Universityress.

413


27/28

414 SOUTHWESTERN JOURNAL OF ANTHROPOLOGYRAGHAVAH,.1962 The Yanadis.New Delhi:Bharatiya dimjatiSevakSangh.RASMUSSEN,K.1908 ThePeopleof thePolarNorth:a Record.Philadelphia:J. . Lippincott.SCHEBESTA, P.1927 Among heForestDwarfsof Malaya.London:Hutchinson.SELIGMANN,C. G., ANDB. Z. SELIGMANN1911 The Veddas.Cambridge:Universityress.SERVICE, E. R.1962 Primitive ocialOrganization. ew York:Random ouse.SHARMA,A.1963 "NegritoProblem n India:New Perspectives,"n Anthropology n theMarch (ed. by BalaRatnam),pp. 89-103.Madras:TheBook Centre.SKEAT,W. W., ANDC. O. BLAGDEN1906 PaganRacesof theMalayPeninsula.London:Macmillan.SPENCER, R. F.1959 The North AlaskanEskimo:a Study in Ecologyand Society.Bureauof AmericanEthnology, ulletin171.STEWARD, J.H.1938 Basin-PlateauAboriginalSociopoliticalGroups.Bureau of AmericanEthnology, ulletin120.1955 Theoryof CultureChange.Urbana, llinois:Universityf IllinoisPress.TEMPLE, R. C.1903 The Andamanand NicobarIslands:Reporton the Census.Censusof

India,1901,vol.3. Calcutta:Governmentf IndiaPress.THOMAS, E. M.1959 The HarmlessPeople.New York:AlfredA. Knopf.THOMPSON, D. F.1949 EconomicStructureand the CeremonialExchangeCycle in ArnhemLand.Melbourne:Macmillan.THURSTON,E., AND K. RANGACHARI1909 Castesand Tribesof Southern ndia.Madras:Governmentress.TURNBULL,C. M.1960 "Initiation mongthe BambutiPygmiesof the CentralIturi,"in Cul-turesand Societies f Africa (ed. by S. and P. Ottenberg),pp. 421-442.New York:Random ouse.1961 The ForestPeople.New York:Simon ndSchuster.1965 "TheMbutiPygmiesof the Congo," n Peoplesof Africa (ed. by J. L.Gibbs),pp.279-317.New York:Holt,Rinehart, ndWinston.WARNER, W. L.1958 A BlackCivilization. ev.ed.New York:Harperand Brothers.WEYER,E. M.1932 The Eskimos:Their EnvironmentndFolkways.New Haven:YaleUni-versityPress.WHITING,B. B.

1950 PaiuteSorcery.VikingFundPublicationsn Anthropology5.


28/28

SYMMETRICRESPECTAND MEMORATEKNOWLEDGE 415WHTING, J. W. M.1965 Personal communication.WHITING,. W. M., AND . L. CHILD1953 Child Training and Personality.New Haven:Yale University Press.

UNIVERSITYPTEXASAUSTIN,TEXAS

the structure and ecology of individualistic

Documents