EAZ – Ethnographisch-Archaeologische Zeitschrift

Pottery Production among the Phom of Nagaland

Ditamulü Vasa — Thu, 30 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0200

The most remarkable feature of traditional pottery making in the Naga communities of Northeast India is the absolute simplicity of raw materials and tools involved in their production. However, traditional pottery production has been undergoing significant transformations due to the widespread impact of the modern mode of living on local indigenous habits and culture. This paper presents the results of recent ethnographic fieldwork conducted in January 2021 among Phom Naga communities, in the last two surviving potters’ villages in the region, where a few women who are knowledgeable about the craft can still be found. The article provides an insight into the new and original features of local indigenous pottery production handed down through generations, considers the data collected during the ethnographic fieldwork in the context of archaeological pottery collections from Nagaland, and highlights the deep roots of this tradition. The paper also discusses beliefs, taboos, and rituals associated with local pot making and views the development of this traditional craft from a socio-economic perspective. The study highlights the fact that local traditional pottery making is primarily the prerogative of women and that ceramics production is lucrative for the household, especially for its women.

संक्षेप

पूर्वोत्तर भारत के नागा समुदायों में पारंपरिक मिट्टी के बर्तन बनाने की सबसे उल्लेखनीय विशेषता उनके उत्पादन में शामिल कच्चे माल और उपकरणों की पूर्ण सादगी है । हालांकि, स्थानीय स्वदेशी आदतों और संस्कृति पर आधुनिक जीवन शैली के व्यापक प्रभाव के कारण पारंपरिक मिट्टी के बर्तनों का उत्पादन महत्वपूर्ण परिवर्तनों के दौर से गुजर रहा है। यह पत्र जनवरी 2021 में फोम नागा समुदायों के बीच क्षेत्र के अंतिम दो जीवित कुम्हारों के गांवों में किए गए हाल के नृवंशविज्ञान फील्डवर्क के परिणाम प्रस्तुत करता है, जहां शिल्प के बारे में जानकार कुछ महिलाएं अभी भी पाई जा सकती हैं। यह लेख, पीढ़ियों के माध्यम से सौंपे गए स्थानीय स्वदेशी मिट्टी के बर्तनों के उत्पादन की नई और मूल विशेषताओं में एक अंतर्दृष्टि प्रदान करता है, नागालैंड से पुरातात्विक मिट्टी के बर्तनों के संग्रह के संदर्भ में नृवंशविज्ञान फील्डवर्क के दौरान एकत्र किए गए आंकड़ों पर विचार करता है, और इस परंपरा की गहरी जड़ों पर प्रकाश डालता है। यह प्रपत्र स्थानीय बर्तन बनाने से जुड़ी मान्यताओं, वर्जनाओं और अनुष्ठानों पर भी चर्चा करता है और इस पारंपरिक शिल्प के विकास को सामाजिक-आर्थिक दृष्टिकोण से देखता है।अध्ययन इस तथ्य पर भी प्रकाश डालता है कि स्थानीय पारंपरिक मिट्टी के बर्तन बनाना मुख्य रूप से महिलाओं का विशेषाधिकार है और मिट्टी के बर्तनों का उत्पादन घर के लिए, विशेष रूप से इसकी महिलाओं के लिए आकर्षक है।

Cali

Nagamia seyie northeastern India tsatie kelhoumiakoe thiedzü rügali kechü ha se kemeyie seya mu ukoe kechü mhanyako u thuo pfhülie di chüse parlieya. Thiedzü kerieki rügali kechü hau geinu rüdise tsiedo kelhouzho-u medziketa la khenu mha kechü zhoko mu kelhouzhoko bie kediwatazhükecü ngulie. Mhathu hau Doshü 2021 ki ethnographic fieldwork idi Phom Naga seyieko nu mhachü vo, sidi kicha sütsa rüna kenie nu rügali tsie rei chü keba nu thenumia huo rügali kechü dorhü si pevi keba ngulie. Lisi mhathu hau nu mha kesa mu khenumia rügali kechü mhasiko thiedzü keriekimia nouyie geinu keyiese ketsurko, ethnographic fieldwork idi thechüko nu vo di mhapfhü chü kengukelie, archaeological pottery idi rügali Nagamia kijü chüpie kebako pfhü kengulie, mu keriekimia kelhouzho nu chü kevor puo bodeko se mhathu bodeko chülietuo. Mhathu hau kepele, kenyü, mu ruosuo kechüko sa di rügali kechü mu mechü krotho-e mhathomhachü kimhie di chü kehielieya shi icüko le petou di kecaputuo. Mhathu dzephrü hau khenu keriekimia rügali kechü nu thenumiae chüyakezha mu kitiekinu rütso puorhi kekreicü nyaüra bahurei thenumiae chüse paryakezhako hiechieshütuo.

On the Changeful History of Franz Boas’s Concept of Cultural Relativism

Hans Peter Hahn — Mon, 24 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0200

Cultural relativism has its roots in an era long before the emergence of anthropology. Anthropologists, and Franz Boas in particular, took up this concept in order to establish the paradigm of a holistic description of cultures. This concept refrains from any kind of judgements about cultures or comparisons between them. According to cultural relativism there is no objective parameter to adequately describe the value of a culture. Only the subjective perspective of a culture’s members can inform about its particularities. The emphasis on differences and the idea that each part of a culture stands for a coherent whole are other closely related features of descriptions in the framework of cultural relativism.

Boas’s innovative method and therewith the cultural relativist perspective has been so successful that today it can be considered one of the principles of the appreciation of multicultural societies. At the same time, however, it became clear that the renunciation of any critical assessment can also be a handicap for ethnographic description. The rejection of universal norms, such as human rights, and the rejection of criteria applied to a culture from the outside make ethnologists blind to cultural conflicts and power asymmetries. Cultural relativism is thus both an extremely successful concept and a problem for the future shape of anthropology.

Franz Boas Refracted Through His Local Collaborators: A Legacy with Implications for Collaborative Archaeologies

Bill Angelbeck — Thu, 08 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0200

Collaborative ethnographies and community-based archaeologies have become more commonplace throughout anthropology in recent decades. Well over a century ago, Franz Boas initiated collaborations with Indigenous community members. Some of his Indigenous collaborators became recognized scholars themselves, such as George Hunt (Tlingit/Kwakwaka’wakw) and William Beynon (Tsimshian). He also involved James Teit, a settler from the Shetlands who married a Nlaka’pamux woman and became an exemplary anthropologist and advocate for Indigenous rights. Here, I will discuss how these close collaborations transformed Boas’s thinking, with ramifications throughout the discipline. In these examples, we find a dialectical interplay whereby Indigenous groups actively sought to use the anthropological medium to their needs; in turn, anthropologists like Boas and Teit recognized the scholarly need for activism to aid Indigenous groups under the constraints of colonial rule. In important ways, however, Boas did not meet the standards that his own ideas set forth. These partnerships from over a century ago still have implications for contemporary collaborations as instructive histories of successes and failures, for both theory in the expansion of interpretative potential and range and for anthropological praxis in the context of settler-colonial relationships.

Franz Boas: Between Anti-Racism and Reification

Susan Pollock, Reinhard Bernbeck — Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0100

Franz Boas has often been lauded for his anti-racist stance. A closer look at his scholarship suggests that he was, at best, inconsistent in this regard, especially in terms of his engagements with Afro-Americans versus Native Americans. We examine his collecting practices, in particular his acquisition of human remains, during his early research trips, arguing that these reveal quite problematic attitudes towards Native Americans. We frame our arguments by drawing on Axel Honneth’s recognition theory and his distinctions between recognition, reification and objectification. We contend that Boas’s work was, despite his many important contributions, also pervaded by epistemic and structural violence.

Decolonizing Archaeological Practice in Northeast India: Views from the Community Archaeology Initiatives in Nagaland

Tiatoshi Jamir — Mon, 19 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0100

Nagaland has a significant wealth of oral traditions closely tied to ancestral sites. Ancestral sites represent pre-colonial indigenous occupation and serve as a collective memory for groups of descent, for example, as part of narratives of group migrations from prominent sites of dispersal. Despite such direct historical continuity, the participatory role and involvement of local communities in archaeological research in India are largely peripheral. Hence, whether in other parts of India or the Northeast region, due to the ancestral heritage and traditional knowledge of local communities associated with the ancestral sites, it is necessary to adopt a decolonizing approach in the study of these places. This approach includes community-based participatory research (CBPR) that involves descendant and non-descendant communities residing within the proximity of archaeological sites. Such research is essential to unlocking new challenges and opportunities within the disciplinary practice. Against this background, I present some case studies from Nagaland that demonstrate the potential and relevance of such an approach to the study of ancestral sites in Northeast India.

Résumé

Le Nagaland possède une richesse importante de traditions orales étroitement liées aux sites ancestraux. Les sites ancestraux représentent l'occupation indigène pré-coloniale et servent de mémoire collective pour les groupes de descendance, par exemple, dans le cadre des récits de migrations de groupes à partir de sites de dispersion importants. Malgré cette continuité historique directe, le rôle participatif et l'implication des communautés locales dans la recherche archéologique en Inde sont largement marginaux. Par conséquent, que ce soit dans d'autres parties de l'Inde ou dans la région du Nord-Est, en raison du patrimoine ancestral et des connaissances traditionnelles des communautés locales associées aux sites ancestraux, il est nécessaire d'adopter une approche décolonisatrice dans l'étude de ces lieux. Cette approche comprend la recherche participative basée sur la communauté (CBPR) qui implique les communautés descendantes et non descendantes résidant à proximité des sites archéologiques. Une telle recherche est essentielle pour relever de nouveaux défis et opportunités dans la pratique disciplinaire. Dans ce contexte, je présente quelques études de cas du Nagaland qui démontrent le potentiel et la pertinence d'une telle approche pour l'étude des sites ancestraux dans le Nord-Est de l'Inde.

Narratives, Concepts and Data: The Relevance of Franz Boas’s Research Perspective for European Archaeology

Martin Furholt — Mon, 24 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0200

Starting out from a general appreciation of the work of Franz Boas for the field of European archaeology, I discuss his epistemological position, which favoured an inductive over what he perceived as an ideologically biased, deductive approach to anthropology. Today, the 19th-century German inductive tradition with which Boas identified himself has fallen out of fashion in European archaeology, and the broad strokes of human history are commonly described in terms of models largely based on deductive reasoning. The social evolutionist motifs that are prominent in the mainstream narratives on prehistoric societies largely reproduce modern prejudices about social organisation or about what is assumed to be human nature, and then project these prejudices into the past. This justifies Boas’s critique, as the archaeological material itself does not seem to play any significant role in the formation of these narratives. Without dismissing the importance of deductive reasoning, I argue that it is crucial that European archaeologists give a more prominent role to the inductive use of empirical data, to enable us to challenge current models and retell prehistory in a way that may reveal novel information about the past. This paper examines the role of modern prejudices in research on different aspects of the European Neolithic, focusing on three powerful myths about human nature that heavily impact the narratives produced about the past, concerning family, power and rationality. This paper then suggests alternatives for an understanding of social change in prehistory.

Resumé

Med udgangspunkt i en generel vurdering af Franz Boas' arbejde inden for europæisk arkæologi diskuterer jeg hans epistemologiske holdning, som foretrak en induktiv tilgang frem for en, deduktiv tilgang til antropologien, som han opfattede som ideologisk fordrejet. I dag er den tyske induktive tradition fra det 19. århundrede, som Boas identificerede sig selv med, gået af mode i europæisk arkæologi, og de store linjer i menneskets historie beskrives almindeligvis i form af modeller, der i høj grad er baseret på deduktive argumenter. De social evolutionistiske motiver, der er fremtrædende i de almindelige narrativer om forhistoriske samfund, gengiver i vid udstrækning moderne fordomme om social organisation eller om, hvad der antages at være den menneskelige natur, og projicerer derefter disse fordomme ind i fortiden. Dette bekræfter Boas' kritik, da det arkæologiske materiale i sig selv ikke synes at spille nogen væsentlig rolle i dannelsen af disse narrativer. Uden at afvise betydningen af deduktiv tænkning argumenterer jeg for, at det er afgørende, at europæiske arkæologer giver en mere fremtrædende rolle til den induktive brug af empiriske data, så vi kan udfordre de nuværende modeller og genfortælle forhistorien på en måde, der kan afsløre nye oplysninger om fortiden. Denne artikel undersøger den rolle, som moderne fordomme spiller i forskningen om forskellige aspekter af den europæiske bondestenalder, med fokus på tre stærke myter om den menneskelige natur, som har stor indflydelse på de fortællinger, der produceres om fortiden, vedrørende familie, magt og rationalitet. Derefter foreslår artiklen alternativer til en forståelse af social transformation i forhistorien.

Cornelia Essner. Schädel, Steine und Studenten: Der vielschichtige Anthropologe Felix von Luschan (1854-1924), Berlin, Vergangenheitsverlag 2023

Nils Seethaler — Fri, 04 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0200

Reflections on Franz Boas’s Anthropology and Modern Life

Martin Porr — Thu, 30 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0200

This paper critically engages with the book Anthropology and Modern Life by Franz Boas, which was originally published in 1928. The paper discusses a number of themes addressed in the book and assesses their relevance to current challenges for anthropological research and public engagement. An important element of Boas’s book is his critique of racist thinking as a basis to understand human actions and other aspects of human variability. Even though Boas’s treatment of racism is not entirely unproblematic itself, his critical contributions remain deeply relevant today in light of a resurgence of related ideas in current public discourses and anthropological research contexts. Even though Boas’s views of education appear to be quite eclectic, they can still serve to support a holistic and reflexive approach towards learning, which are aspects that also come under increasing pressure in higher education contexts in many countries right now. Finally, some consequences of Boas’s arguments for current aspects of archaeological issues are discussed, even though archaeology did not feature in Anthropology and Modern Life in any substantial form. However, the core themes of Boas’s book remain applicable to archaeological research and the impact of archaeological knowledge on public discourses. From this arises a particular responsibility with respect to the historical narratives that archaeology produces and their relationship to contemporary issues and challenges.

Teaching Anthropology: Remarks from a German Perspective

Stefanie Samida — Thu, 30 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0200

The Bologna Process opened a new chapter in the German higher education system, starting in 1999. Many new degree programmes have been implemented since then. It is nearly impossible to obtain an overview of the content of the more than 20,000 individual programmes thus far. Twenty-five years ago, this diverse offer of degree programmes would have been unthinkable. At that time, students specialized in Archaeology, German Studies, or Musicology; today, universities offer these subjects within such hybrid degree programmes as ‘Comparative Studies in Culture and Religion’, ‘Health and Society in South Asia’, or ‘Literary and Cultural Theory’. However, not only degree programmes diversify increasingly. The groups of students attending the courses have also continuously become more heterogeneous. Future archaeologists sit next to students of Transcultural Studies, and students of the teaching degree programme sit next to students of Global History. This raises such questions as ‘What does anthropology stand for?’, ‘How is anthropology conceptualized today?’, and ‘What does “teaching anthropology” mean?’.

The paper will touch on these questions and give an idea of my understanding of ‘teaching anthropology’, which is closely linked to my own academic biography. Consequently, this contribution is more of an essay-like attempt to prompt a discussion on today’s teaching of anthropology.

Editorial: A Space for Difference

Thu, 30 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0200