Donald Bruce Mackay

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Donald Bruce Mackay ETHNICITY AND ISRAELITlE RELIGION: ANTaROPoLOGY OF SOCIAL BOUND- IN Donald Bruce MacKay A thesis submitted in confonnity with the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Graduate Centre for the Study of Religion, in the University of Toronto Copyright by Donald Bruce MacKay 1997 National Library Bibliothèque nationale I*m of Canada du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Services services bibliographiques 395 Wellington Street 395. rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A ON4 Ottawa ON KIA ON4 Canada Canada The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence dowing the exclusive permettant à la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute or sel1 reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microfom, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfiche/film, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts £tom it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or othenvise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. Ethnicity and Israelite Religion: The Anthropology of Social Boundaries in Judges Doctor of Philosophy 1997 Donald Bruce MacKay Centre for the Study of Religion University of Toronto The purpose of this interdisciplinary work is to examine expressions of dif- ferentiation among groups of people named in the stories of the major judges in the book of Judges in order to determine if the narratives depict identity, segregation, and interaction among groups and their representatives in a manner which may be inter- preted appropriately as "ethnic." An anthropological mode1 of ethnicity is proposed which recognizes the combination of two facets, one which emphasizes the essential, traditional, and primordial aspects of gmup identity and a second which creates, recreatss, and accentuates differences and makes claims of ethnic uniqueness within the context of particular circumstances. The models and assumptions about ethnicity employed by a number of biblical historians with regard to the issue of Israelite identity are surveyed to demonstrate their lack of theoretical and epistemological clarity regarding ethnicity. To illustrate the application of a theoretically clear model of ethnicity, the narratives of the *majormjudges, Ehud, Deborah, Gideon, Abimelek, Jephthah, and Samson, viewed in this study as compositions of the Deuteronornistic historian, are examineci to interpret whether or not the stories depict the two facets of ethnicity descnbed by the model. The purpose is not to wnte an ethnic history of early Israel, but to determine if the picture of relations in the stones of the major judges is consistent with the model of ethnicity. The thesis of this work is that the stories of the major judges, as composed by the Deuteronomistic historian, do express both primordial and circumstantial aspects of ethnicity in describing relations among the various gmups and individuals associ- ated with the major judges. Group narnes, genealogical details, and religion are the primary feaîures expressing differences in a priori primordial terms. Economic, political, and religious interactions are the main features describing differences dependent on particular circumstances. The conclusion is that gmups are descnbed in a manner consistent with the proposed model of ethnicity and that, as depicted in the narratives of ludges, ethnic identity is not entirely fixed or static but is also pictured king defiin response to changing conditions. It gives great pleasure at the end of this long joumey to acknow1edge those who offered the assistance, advice, criticisrn, and encouragement that accompanied all of my steps along the way. First and foremost to the rnernbers of my dissertation com- mittee, E. G. Clarke, Department of Near Eastern Studies; S. A. Nagata, Department of Anthropology; and E. B. Banning, Department of Anthropology, I give heartfelt thanks cullectively and individually for providing thoughtfd evaluation and helpfid encouragement at every step. 1 also wish to thank Walter E. Aufrecht, University of Lethbridge, for unfaihg support and encouragement over the many yean since he gave the fmt push which smed me off on this road. Thanks go as weIl to Robert J. Rogerson of the Department of Geography, University of Lethbridge, for support dur- ing the final stages of writing. Of the fellow students, teachen, and scholars who have provided assistance and inspiration, 1 wish to single out Russell T. McCutcheon for houn of stirnulating intellectual excitement and pleasure exploring ideas and their implications; D. Alan Aycock and Norman L. Buchignani for responding to my nascent struggles with eth- nicity; Marvin A. Sweeney for penetrating criticisms of my early work on Judges; friends among the staff and volunteers at the Tel Miqne - Ekron Excavations for, over the past six seasons, providing an exciting environment in which to tentatively begin exploring some of the historical implications of this work; Bruce and Carolyn Rout- ledge for empathy and cumpanionship as we travelled along similar paths; Kevin McGeough for his insight; and to Ry Cooder and David Wilcox for emotional and spiritual support through good times and bad. This work is the culmination of an invesîment which 1 would not have been able to make without the support of a number of institutions. 1 wish to thank the University of Toronto, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada @octord Fellowship #452-90- l472), and the Samuel H. Kress Foundation for fellowships which enableci the completion of the research for this study. Special thanks go to S. Gitin and the staff of the W.F. Albright Institute of ArchamIogid Research in Jerusalem and the other FelIows of the 1993-1994 academic year for sup port while I held the Kress Fellowship. Finally, 1 wish to thank my parents, Donald C. and Margaret J. MacKay and my sister M. Gillian MacKay, for support and encouragement through aU the years of schwling and univenity education. Thanks in particular go to rny father for instilling in me a work ethic and an appreciation for science which 1 seemed to have gained, appropriately, more by osmosis than by instruction. Special thanks go to FLora MacKay, my closest travelling cornpanion, and to Elizabeth MacKay, who joined us part-way through the trip, for aii the cornfort, wmpassion, and sacrifices on this one long leg of our joumey together. D. Bruce MacKay Contents Introduction Ethnic Theory Introduction The Primordialist Approach The Circumstantidist Approach The Integrative Synthetic Approach Representative Views on Israeïite Ethnie Identity Introduction Conquest Theorists Immigration Theorists Intemal Revolt Theokts Post-Revolt Theorists Conclusion Ehud: Judges 3 :1 2-3 :30 Introduction Primordial Features Circumstantial Features Conciusion Deborah: Judges 4 Introduction PIimordia.1 Featuies Circumstantial Features Conclusion Deborah: Judges 5 Introduction Primordial Feaîures Circumstantial Features Conclusion Gideon: Judges 6: 1 - 8:30 Introduction Primordial Feaîures Circumstantial Features Conclusion Abimelek: Judges 8:30 - 957 Introduction Primordial Feaîures Circumstantial Features Conclusion Jephthah: Judges 10: 17 - l2:7 Introduction Primordial Features Circumstantial Features Conclusion Samson: Judges 13: 1 - 16:31 Introduction Primordial Features Circumstantial Features Conchsion Conclusion Bibliography Introduction Ethnic relations and ethnicity are prominent in the research agendas of many anthmpologists and çociologists. ' And although there is spiriteci scholarly debate within these fields over the exact meaning of ethnicity and about the best theoretical approach to use in its study, the concept has not remained cloistered in esoteric academic halls. Ethnicity is a force which also attracts a sizable share of current pub- lic and media attention. Inde&, in recent yûan the reverberations hm'ethnic" con- fiicts around the world have often pmpelled the concept to centre stage of humanity's concerns in the late twentieth century (Tambiah 1989). Discussion of ethnicity has spilled over academic boundaries and has figurai in the work of many other scholars, as weil, not just anthropologists and sociologists. Furthemore, since many ethnic groups voice their claims to autonomy and express their identity in ternis of religion (Banuazizi and Weiner 1986), ethnicity, ethnic relations, and ethnic identities should dm be of interest to scholars of religion. Ethnic gmups, ethnic identity, ethnic relations, and ethnicity are concepts cen- tral to anthropological research on group identity and on the general tendency of human beings to separate themselves into groups (Eisenstadt and Giesen 1995). The overarching question for social scientists concerns the motivation and justification for this segmenting of human populations. Are ethnic group identities expressed by gmup members as the result of a priori, inherent, and nahiral forces which impose sepration and constrain the actions of the members of the group? Or are the motiva- The Literature is vat but, for eumple, peruse any issue of the foilowing jourmis for a representative range of studies: Erhniciry, Erhnic Groups, 2he Journal of Erhnic Sncdies, Erhnic and Racial Sdies, Erhnic
Recommended publications
  • North American Academic Research Introduction
    + North American Academic Research Journal homepage: http://twasp.info/journal/home Research Between the Forest and the Village: the New Social Forms of the Baka’s Life in Transition Richard Atimniraye Nyelade 1,2* 1This article is an excerpt of my Master thesis in Visual Cultural Studies defended at the University of Tromso in Norway in December 2015 under the supervision of Prof Bjørn Arntsen 2Research Officer, Institute of Agricultural Research for Development, P.O.Box 65 Ngaoundere, Cameroon; PhD student in sociology, University of Shanghai, China *Corresponding author [email protected] Accepted: 29 February , 2020; Online: 07 March, 2020 DOI : https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3700533 Abstract: The Baka are part of hunter-gatherers group of central Africa generally called “pygmies”. They are most often presented as an indigenous, monolithic and marginalised entity. After a fieldwork carried out in Nomedjoh village in South-Easthern Cameroon, audiovisual and qualitative data have been collected. The theoretical framework follows the dichotomy between structuralism and constructivism. While the former considers identity as a sum of artefacts identifiable and transmissible from generation to generation, the latter, notably with Fredrik Barth, defines ethnicity as a heterogeneous and dynamic entity that changes according to the time and space. Beyond this controversy, the data from Nomedjoh reveal that the Baka community is characterised by two trends: while one group is longing for the integration into modernity at any cost, the other group stands for the preservation of traditional values. Hence, the Baka are in a process of transition. Keywords: Ethnicity, identity, structuralism, constructivism, transition. Introduction After the Cold War and the fall of the Berlin Wall, the world entered into a new era characterised by the triumph of globalisation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Making and Unmaking of Ethnic Boundaries: a Multilevel Process Theory1
    The Making and Unmaking of Ethnic Boundaries: A Multilevel Process Theory1 Andreas Wimmer University of California, Los Angeles Primordialist and constructivist authors have debated the nature of ethnicity “as such” and therefore failed to explain why its charac- teristics vary so dramatically across cases, displaying different de- grees of social closure, political salience, cultural distinctiveness, and historical stability. The author introduces a multilevel process theory to understand how these characteristics are generated and trans- formed over time. The theory assumes that ethnic boundaries are the outcome of the classificatory struggles and negotiations between actors situated in a social field. Three characteristics of a field—the institutional order, distribution of power, and political networks— determine which actors will adopt which strategy of ethnic boundary making. The author then discusses the conditions under which these negotiations will lead to a shared understanding of the location and meaning of boundaries. The nature of this consensus explains the particular characteristics of an ethnic boundary. A final section iden- tifies endogenous and exogenous mechanisms of change. TOWARD A COMPARATIVE SOCIOLOGY OF ETHNIC BOUNDARIES Beyond Constructivism The comparative study of ethnicity rests firmly on the ground established by Fredrik Barth (1969b) in his well-known introduction to a collection 1 Various versions of this article were presented at UCLA’s Department of Sociology, the Institute for Migration Research and Intercultural Studies of the University of Osnabru¨ ck, Harvard’s Center for European Studies, the Center for Comparative Re- search of Yale University, the Association for the Study of Ethnicity at the London School of Economics, the Center for Ethnicity and Citizenship of the University of Bristol, the Department of Political Science and International Relations of University College Dublin, and the Department of Sociology of the University of Go¨ttingen.
    [Show full text]
  • Owh6sigrist 01.Pdf
    Christian Sigrist: Segmentary Societies: The Evolution and Actual Relevance of an Interdisciplinary Conception. in: Bernhard Streck (Hg.): Segmentation und Komplementarität. Organisatorische, ökonomische und kulturelle Aspekte der Interaktion von Nomaden und Sesshaften. Beiträge der Kolloquia am 25.10.2002 und 27.06.2003. Halle 2004 (Orientwissenschaftliche Hefte 14; Mitteilungen des SFB „Differenz und Integration“ 6) S. 3–31. © Christian Sigrist 2004 Segmentary Societies: The Evolution and Actual Relevance of an Interdisciplinary Conception* Christian Sigrist 1. The evolution of the conception in a colonial context and its sociological and anthropological roots In the first year of the Second World War Meyer Fortes and Edward Evans-Pritchard published a reader on African Political Systems (APS) as an attempt to bring into focus one of the major problems of “African sociology” (1940: VII): This epistemic designation appears to be remark- able. The editors could have named it as well: African ethnology. The deviation from academic routine corresponded on the one hand to the epistemological orientation of the “British School” of social anthropology. On the other hand, it ostentatively elevated African societies on the same cognitive level as “advanced” industrial societies paying tribute to rising sensitivity among African intellectuals. And thirdly, the title reflects acute political concerns of colonial policy, particularly in the field of indirect rule. The authors drew attention to the contradictory results of British interventions in the domain of indirect rule in different types of societies. Whereas non-centralised societies were exposed to a process of centralisa- tion by the introduction of chieftainship, in the centralised ones the power of traditional chiefs was diminished.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 HIST 2732: Power & Inequality Core Course Fall 2016, University of Pittsburgh Mondays, 1-3:30 Pm Instructor: Lara Putnam
    HIST 2732: Power & Inequality Core Course Fall 2016, University of Pittsburgh Mondays, 1-3:30 pm Instructor: Lara Putnam, [email protected] Office Hours: Mondays 10 am-noon and by appointment Posvar 3702 How have scholars approached the study of power and inequality? How has historical research incorporated and added to theoretical insights coming from other disciplines in this regard? This seminar focuses on four distinct dimensions of power and inequality—class, race/ethnicity, gender, and global disparities—each of which has inspired wide-ranging academic debate on definitions, mechanisms, and the possibility of change. We will survey key scholarly interventions generated by historians, sociologists, anthropologists, feminist theorists, critical geographers, and others, giving priority to the last two decades of theoretical debate and empirical investigation. How are systematic patterns of inequality generated and sustained? What roles do cultural beliefs, social practice, political institutions, and macroeconomics play? How do different kinds of inequality—such as those around class, racism, ethnicity, and gender—interact? How do differently scaled systems of inequality—within the household, community, nation, and international system—interrelate? This course counts towards certificate programs in Cultural Studies, Gender Sexuality and Women’s Studies, and Latin American Studies. Course calendar: 1. Aug. 29: Introduction 2. Sept. 12: Class: Marx and Marxian debates a. Anthony Giddens and David Held, eds., Classes, Power, and Conflict: Classical and Contemporary Debates (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1982). 3. Sept. 19: Class: Thompson and Thompsonian approaches. Note: Lisa Lindsay will join our seminar discussion of her book. a. E. P. Thompson, “Preface,” in The Making of the English Working Class (IICA, 1963), 9-14.
    [Show full text]
  • Haney Foundation Series : Ethnography in Today's World : Color
    Ethnography in Today’s World ................. 18429$ $$FM 05-28-13 10:19:34 PS PAGE i HANEY FOUNDATION SERIES A volume in the Haney Foundation Series, established in 1961 with the generous support of Dr. John Louis Haney ................. 18429$ $$FM 05-28-13 10:19:34 PS PAGE ii Ethnography in Today’s World Color Full Before Color Blind Roger Sanjek UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA PRESS PHILADELPHIA ................. 18429$ $$FM 05-28-13 10:19:34 PS PAGE iii Copyright ᭧ 2014 University of Pennsylvania Press All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations used for purposes of review or scholarly citation, none of this book may be reproduced in any form by any means without written permission from the publisher. Published by University of Pennsylvania Press Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-4112 www.upenn.edu/pennpress Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper 10987654321 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Sanjek, Roger, 1944– Ethnography in today’s world : color full before color blind / Roger Sanjek.—1st ed. p. cm. — (Haney foundation series) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-8122-4545-5 (hardcover : alk. paper) 1. Ethnology—United States—Methodology. 2. Ethnology—Methodology. 3. Anthropology—United States—Methodology. 4. Anthropology—Methodology. I. Title. GN345.S255 2014 305.800973—dc23 2013019444 ................. 18429$ $$FM 05-28-13 10:19:35 PS PAGE iv For my teachers: Anne Schwerner, Robert Stigler, Marvin Harris, Lambros Comitas, Jaap van Velsen, George C. Bond, Allen Johnson ................. 18429$ $$FM 05-28-13 10:19:35 PS PAGE v This page intentionally left blank Contents Preface ix PART I.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    Introduction Robert P. Weller and Keping Wu Th e passing of Fredrik Barth marked the end of an era in anthropology. Nev- ertheless, his contributions also promise new beginnings. As his students and colleagues, we felt nothing could honor our debts to him more than an intellec- tual eff ort that brings attention to his relevance to anthropology today, rather than simply celebrating his legacy. Th is volume attempts to do that by off ering chapters that expand on his work, sometimes argue with it, but always honor its humanist approach. In the process, the book may also serve as a summary of some of his main themes, and it may illustrate how much we owe him intellec- tually, but our main goal is neither intellectual biography nor commemoration. It is instead to pass on Barth’s humanistic tradition of knowledge, so it can live and evolve.1 Such a process of continuous intellectual evolution characterized Barth’s own career as well. In the late 1970s, when Robert attended his graduate sem- inar at Johns Hopkins, Barth was already highly celebrated. Th is was above all because of his introductory essay in Ethnic Groups and Boundaries (1969), which had appeared a decade earlier. Th ough Barth repeatedly said that he was not an expert on ethnicity, this essay fundamentally shifted the way people conceptualize ethnicity—from “cultural stuff ” to the boundaries actors set out to maintain. However, instead of dwelling on his fame or reiterating his earlier ideas, it was clear that Barth at that time was wrestling with new issues, espe- cially with the problem of how to understand a person as both a potentially cre- ative individual and as a product of broader social processes.
    [Show full text]
  • Intellectual Roots of Key Anthropologists
    SELECTIONS FROM ASSESSING CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY Robert Borofsky, editor (1994) New York: McGraw-Hill FREDRIK BARTH is currently Research Fellow under the Norwegian Ministry of Culture and Professor of Anthropology at Emory University. He has previously taught at the universities of Oslo and Bergen, and as a visitor at various American departments of anthropology. He has carried out research in a number of areas, starting in the Middle East with a focus on tribal politics and ecology. His best known works from this period are: Political Leadership among Swat Pathans (1959), Nomads of South Persia (1961), Models of Social Organization (1964), and the edited work Ethnic Groups and Boundaries (1969). Later, he has also done fieldwork in New Guinea and Southeast Asia, and among his publications are Ritual and Knowledge among the Baktaman of New Guinea (1975) and Cosmologies in the Making (1987). A monograph entitled Balinese Worlds will appear in 1993. "After a wartime childhood in Norway, I started at the University of Chicago with an interest in paleontology and human evolution. But the active and rich teaching program of Fred Eggan, Sol Tax, Robert Redfield and others broadened my intellectual horizon and led, after an interlude on a dig in Iraq with Bob Braidwood, to my choice of social anthropology as the focus of my work. My foundations derived indirectly from Radcliffe-Brown, who had taught my teachers during the 1930s. "Like many of my Chicago cohort, I went on to further studies in England. I chose the L.S.E. Autobiographies: 2 and developed a life-long association with Raymond Firth and, even more importantly, with Edmund Leach, whom I later followed to Cambridge for my Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Defining Ethnicity
    ARTICLE DEFINING ETHNICITY Timothy Baumann Timothy Baumann is an Assistant Professor of Anthropology at the University of Missouri, St. Louis. hat is ethnicity? Ethnicity has been best defined with- ancestral land, as with diaspora peoples; and in cultural anthropology, but it has been a debated 6. a sense of solidarity on the part of at least some sections of Wtopic and there is no single definition or theory of the ethnie’s population how ethnic groups are formed. According to John Hutchinson and Anthony Smith (1996:4–5), the term “ethnicity” is relatively In a broader context, Gerald Berreman (1972, 1981) defines eth- new, first appearing in the Oxford English Dictionary in 1953, but nicity as one level of social stratification or social inequality that its English origins are connected to the term “ethnic,” which has also includes race, class, kinship, age, estate, caste, and gender. been in use since the Middle Ages. The true origins of “ethnic” Berreman provides clear distinctions between ethnicity and have been traced back to Greece and the term ethnos, which was race or class. Ethnicity is linked in a dichotic relationship with used in reference to band, tribe, race, a people, or a swarm. race. It is differentiated from race in that racial stratification is associated with birth-ascribed status based on physical and cul- In more recent colonial and immigrant history, the term “eth- tural characteristics defined by outside groups. Ethnicity is also nic” falls under the dichotomy of “Us” and “Them.” The “Us,” ascribed at birth, but the ethnic group normally defines its cul- the majority, are viewed as non-ethnics and the “Them,” new tural characteristics itself.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Theoretical Considerations on Caste
    Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology Vol. 7, 2013 |51 52 | Madhusudan Subedi resources'. In this article, I mainly focus on some key theoretical debates on caste and its changing context. Some Theoretical Considerations on Caste Caste has been discussed in classical Hindu texts, in micro level ethnographic accounts, and in large-scale surveys of attitudes and perceptions, and caste-based mobilizations. What is caste and how can it be defined? What are its core descriptive dimensions? How Madhusudan Subedi could it survive for so long and what keeps it going even in modern, contemporary times (Jodhka 2012)? Although these questions appear to be rather simple and obvious, the rich literature dealing with these issues do not offer any straightforward answers. Abstract Social stratification is the ordering of social differences based on a set of criteria or just one single criterion (Gupta 2000). Caste, Caste as a system of social stratification was an encompassing system class, race, ethnicity, and gender are some of the pertinent categories in the past. There was reciprocal system of exchange goods and of social hierarchy and differentiation in many societies. The term services. With time, occupation and mode of generation of livelihood 'caste' means different things when used by different people in a of various caste groups changed, and the traditional form of jajmani variety of situations. What people mean by caste in everyday life is system fizzled out. This paper provides an account of changing different from its meaning in the traditional literature or from what perspectives of caste relations in social science writing and political people consider to be its traditional and orthodox meaning (Béteille discourse.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethnic Groups and Boundaries by Fredrik Barth
    Ethnic Groups and Boundaries by Fredrik Barth Introduction This collection of essays addresses itself to the problems of ethnic groups and their persistence. This is a theme of great, but neglected, importance to social anthropology. Practically all anthropological reasoning rests on the premise that cultural variation is discontinuous: that there are aggregates of people who essentially share a common culture, and interconnected differences that distinguish each such discrete culture from all others. Since culture is nothing but a way to describe human behaviour, it would follow that there are discrete groups of people, i.e. ethnic units, to correspond to each culture. The differences between cultures, and their historic boundaries and con- nections, have been given much attention; the constitution of ethnic groups, and the nature of the boundaries between them, have not been correspondingly investigated. Social anthropologists have largely avoided these problems by using a highly abstracted concept of 'society' to represent the encompassing social system within which smaller, concrete groups and units may be analysed. But this leaves untouched the empirical characteristics and boundaries of ethnic groups, and the important theoretical issues which an investigation of them raises. Though the naïve assumption that each tribe and people has main- tained its culture through a bellicose ignorance of its neighbours is no longer entertained, the simplistic view that geographical and social isolation have been the critical factors in sustaining cultural diversity persists. An empirical investigation of the character of ethnic boun- daries, as documented in the following essays, produces two discoveries which are hardly unexpected, but which demonstrate the inadequacy of this view.
    [Show full text]
  • The Epistemological Status of the Concept of Ethnicity
    Thomas Hylland Eriksen: The epistemological status of the concept of ethnicity The epistemological status of the concept of ethnicity Thomas Hylland Eriksen University of Oslo, [email protected] Abstract The subject of this paper is the ambiguity of the conceptualisation of ethnicity. Can it fruitfully be regarded as a relational property of any social system, or should the concept rather be confined to a specific kind of historical society, notably those defined as mod- ern societies? In exploring this question, the author draws on selected theoretical and meta-theoretical contributions to the analysis of ethnicity, beginning with Fredrik Barth’s ‘Introduction’ to his edited volume, Ethnic Groups and Boundaries. KEYWORDS: ethnicity, theory, concepts, reflexivity, Fredrik Barth Introduction: The problem It is widely held, by social scientists as well as by lay people, that the members of hu- man groups have an “innate” propensity to distinguish between insiders and outsiders, to delineate social boundaries and to develop stereotypes about “the other” in order to sustain and justify these boundaries. If this is indeed the case, ethnicity can be conceived of as being nearly as universal a characteristic of humanity as gender and age – unlike the phenomena of nationhood and nationalism, which have been so conceptualised in the academic community as to concern the modern world only (Anderson 1999; Gellner 1983). Marx and Engels held, probably correctly, that sex, age and the insider-outsider distinction were universal criteria of differentiation. If, in contrast, ethnicity as we con- ceptualise it can be shown to be a product of a particular kind of society, it can of course not be regarded as an ahistorical and universal phenomenon.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethnic Groups and Boundaries by Fredrik Barth
    Ethnic Groups and Boundaries by Fredrik Barth Introduction This collection of essays addresses itself to the problems of ethnic groups and their persistence. This is a theme of great, but neglected, importance to social anthropology. Practically all anthropological reasoning rests on the premise that cultural variation is discontinuous: that there are aggregates of people who essentially share a common culture, and interconnected differences that distinguish each such discrete culture from all others. Since culture is nothing but a way to describe human behaviour, it would follow that there are discrete groups of people, i.e. ethnic units, to correspond to each culture. The differences between cultures, and their historic boundaries and con- nections, have been given much attention; the constitution of ethnic groups, and the nature of the boundaries between them, have not been correspondingly investigated. Social anthropologists have largely avoided these problems by using a highly abstracted concept of 'society' to represent the encompassing social system within which smaller, concrete groups and units may be analysed. But this leaves untouched the empirical characteristics and boundaries of ethnic groups, and the important theoretical issues which an investigation of them raises. Though the naïve assumption that each tribe and people has main- tained its culture through a bellicose ignorance of its neighbours is no longer entertained, the simplistic view that geographical and social isolation have been the critical factors in sustaining cultural diversity persists. An empirical investigation of the character of ethnic boun- daries, as documented in the following essays, produces two discoveries which are hardly unexpected, but which demonstrate the inadequacy of this view.
    [Show full text]