CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY Vol. 23, No. 5, October 1982 ? 1982by The Wenner-GrenFoundation for Anthropological Research, all rightsreserved 0011-3204/82/2305-0001$01.85

The Significanceof Food Storage among Hunter-Gatherers:Residence Patterns, Population Densities,and Social Inequalities

by Alain Testart

HUNTING-AND-GATHERING SOCIETIES have oftenbeen viewed point of view, such a dichotomyraises a problem:how to ac- as forminga singlecategory about whichit is easy to generalize: count for the fact that, with the same basic food-gathering it willbe sufficienthere to recallthe concept of the "band level economy,two verydifferent levels of social complexitycan be of integration"of Steward (1955) and Service (1966) or the attained.Grosse (p. 27) soughta solutionto thisproblem with rathertentative notion of "nomadicstyle" of Lee and DeVore referenceto ecology:according to his pioneeringstudy, "upper (1968). Such generalapproaches can be upheldonly if a number hunters"were able to raisetheir cultural level above thatof the of food-gatheringsocieties are treatedas exceptionsand dis- othersbecause of a richerand morestable production"owing carded. NorthwestCoast societiesare oftenconsidered to be mainly to advantageous natural conditions" (translation such exceptions.As Suttles (1968:56) puts it, "the Northwest mine).' Neoevolutionistsor culturalecologists years later re- Coast peoplesseem to have attainedthe highest known levels of sortedto thesame typeof explanation (e.g., Steward1955:175; cultural complexityachieved on a food-gatheringbase and Service 1962:47; 1966:3; Goldschmidt1959:190). among the highestknown levels of population density.The I intendto presenthere a differentsolution: I willargue that NorthwestCoast refutesmany seeminglyeasy generalizations the reason there are two differentkinds of food-gathering about people without horticultureor herds." Californiais societiesis that thereare two radicallydistinct types of econ- anothercase in point: "The abundance of plant and animal omy.The first,which is foundamong nomadic hunter-gatherers resourcesand the developmentof storagetechniques and other such as the Bushmenand the AustralianAborigines, is based trulyskilled applicationsof human ingenuityallowed these on theimmediate use offood resources. This economyis flexible peopleto developbeyond the normal parameters of hunting and and relieson multiplealternative strategies. The second,which gathering,particularly in the sociological,philosophical, and is foundamong more sedentary foragers such as the Northwest religiousrealms" (Bean and Lawton 1973:36; for similarre- Coast and CaliforniaIndians, is based on large-scaleseasonal markson CaliforniaIndians, see also King 1972,Kunkel 1974, food storage.In the firstpart of this paper, I shall point out Gould 1975,and others).These factshave been wellknown for the conditionsunderlying the latter type of economy and a long time. As early as the end of the last century,Grosse delineateits consequencesfor the societyas a whole. In the (1896) made a distinctionbetween two kinds of hunters:the second part, I shall use the cross-culturalcodes publishedby "lower" and the "upper." He classifiedthe NorthwestCoast Murdockand othersto show howa distinctionbetween storing and CaliforniaIndians among the latter. From a materialist and nonstoringtypes of economiesmay account for the ob- serveddifferences among hunting-and-gathering societies.

ALAIN TESTART is a Research Associate of the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (mailing address: Maison des THE STORING HUNTER-GATHERER ECONOMY Sciences de l'Homme, 54 boulevard Raspail, 75270 Paris Cedex 06, France). Born in 1945,he was educated at the Ecole Nationale A DEFINITION Superieuredes Mines de Paris (dipl6me d'ingenieur,1968) and the Universitede Paris VII (doctoratde 3amecycle en ethnologie, Wheresome naturalfood resources are bountifulbut seasonal, 1975). His research interestsare the social organizationof the theycan be gathereden masse whileavailable and storedon a AustralianAborigines and the anthropologyof hunter-gatherers. largescale once transformedthrough appropriate food preser- His publicationsinclude Des classificationsdualistes en Australie: Essai sur l'evolutionde l'organisationsociale (Paris and Lille: vation techniques,thus becomingthe staple food year-round. Editions de la Maison des Sciences de l'Homme and Lille III This possibilitylies at the intersectionof fourconditions, two 1978), "Bandes et clans en Australie" (Journalde la Socigtedes ecological (abundance and seasonalityof resources)and two Oceanistes 61:147-59), "Some Puzzling Dualistic Classifica- technical(efficient food-getting and food-storagetechniques). tions in New South Wales" (Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde136:64-89), "Pour une typologie des chasseurs- The presenceof these fourconditions determines an economy cueilleurs" (Anthropologieet Societs 5[2]:177-221), and Les chasseurs-cueilleurset la revolutionneolithique (in press). 1 "vor Allem dank einer besonderen Gunst der natiirlichen The presentpaper was submittedin finalform 11 xii 81. Bedingungen."

Vol. 23 - No. 5 * October1982 523

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Sat, 11 Jan 2014 17:10:33 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions in whichstorage provides the bulk of foodduring the season of are highlyseasonal, sedentarism and large-scalestorage imply scarcity.This economyhas twomain characteristics. each other:storage brings forth sedentarism, and sedentarism The firstis a conspicuousseasonal variationin the intensity presupposesstorage. Which historicallyprecedes the other offood-getting activities. During the season of plenty, when the is a chicken-and-eggquestion. naturalenvironment abounds in foodresources, these have to The usual residenceof hunter-gathererspracticing storage is be gatheredin sufficientlylarge quantitiesnot only to satisfy a villageor a permanentcamp builtaround food reserves from theimmediate nutritional needs of the community,but also to whichseasonal expeditionsrequiring a certainmobility, such be storedin orderto cope withthe nextseason of scarcity:this as hunting,are launched. What characterizesthis residence is the time when productiveactivities, such as food-getting, patternis not so much the total absence of mobility,but, be it hunting,fishing, or gathering,and food preparationfor first,a greatersedentarism than in the case of nonstoring preservation,are at theirpeak. During the season of scarcity, hunter-gatherers,which is frequentlyreflected in the natureof thebulk of subsistenceis ensuredby thestored food already at dwellings,and secondly,permanence of residenceduring the hand: food productionis then at its lowest. The season of season of scarcity. scarcityis thusa timeof leisure,of enjoymentand festivities; It is importantto stress that we are concernedhere only it is also the timewhen the biggestand mostimportant rituals withintensive storage of basic fooditems. Other kinds of storage are usuallyperformed. This specificseasonal alternation in the may be practicedby huntersand gatherers-forinstance, the intensityof workis a distinctivefeature of the storingecon- storageof nonfooditems such as raw materials,completed or omy. In the economyin which food storageplays an unim- partlycompleted products, and so on, or of fooditems, subsid- portantrole, food productionis a day-to-daypreoccupation iaryor basic, thatare limitedin quantity.Limited food storage correspondingto physiologicalneeds. The intensityof this does not entaila sedentaryway of life,since the bulk of subsis- activitymay vary slightlyfrom one season to another,but tenceis stillensured by periodicshifts. In addition,such storage thereis no reasonto thinkthat therewill be a decreasein the is notincompatible with nomadism, either because it consistsof intensityof workduring the season in whichfood resources are small quantitiesof preservedfoods carried by the membersof scarcerand harderto get. thegroup or because it constitutesa stockleft behind as a kind The secondcharacteristic of the storingeconomy is its rela- of insurance against misfortuneto which the community tive rigidity.The generalflexibility of the economybased on returnsas a last resort. the immediateconsumption of foodarises fromthe factthat it The importanceof storageis widelyacknowledged by pre- relieson a multiplicityof alternative strategies for the exploita- historians(Flannery 1969:78; 1973:280-81; Reed 1977a: 550; tion of the environment.In the storingeconomy, planning 1977b:900, 942-43; Redman 1977:528, 537; Hassan 1977:595) playsa crucialrole. Central to theeconomic cycle is theseasonal firstas a preadaptivefeature leading to the inventionof agri- establishmentof food stores; an abundant harvest and the culturein theNear East and secondas a practicetied to seden- adequate handlingof the product for preservationare both tarismin the case of prehistoricfood-gathering groups such as essential for the survival of the communityuntil the next the Natufians.Reed (1969:367, n. 21) indicatesthat village harvest.If theproducts deteriorate over timeor ifwinter lasts lifeimplies the existenceof an establishedfood resource which too long,famine threatens the community. can be gatheredin quantityand storedin special places: "The These two characteristicssuffice to show how the storing firstsimple villages may have grown around such storage economydiffers from the generalmodel which has been attrib- places." Flannery (1972:28) suggests "that the origin of uted to hunter-gatherers.For a societywith such an economy, 'sedentarylife' had moreto do withthe installationand main- furtherand morefundamental characteristics are to be expected tenanceof permanentfacilities . .. thanit did withagriculture withregard to residencepatterns (sedentarism or nomadism), per se." So does Smith (1976:27-28): "Except underunusual populationdensity, and socioeconomicinequalities. circumstances,when adequate supplies of food are locally 1. A sedentaryway oflife. Large reservesof foodare incom- available all year round, the degree of sedentismof a com- patible with residentialmobility (Sahlins 1972:31-32; Jordan munityis relatedto the maintenanceof foodreserves." Taylor 1974): on the one hand, nomadicpeople are reluctantto pre- (1973) considersstorage one of the most fundamentalaspects serve and store food to any significantextent; on the other of the NeolithicRevolution. On the otherhand, the topic of hand, the accumulationof stocks urges people to adopt a storagehas been of littleinterest to anthropologistsconcerned settled way of life. However, this well-knownaspect of the with hunter-gatherers.J. Lips (1928) and E. Lips (1951-52, relationshipbetween storage and sedentarismmasks another 1956), however,have put forwardthe notionof "harvesting importantaspect. people" (Erntevdlker)characterized among otherthings by an In an environmentin which thereare seasonal variations, importantform of storage and a greatersedentarism. More nomadichunter-gatherers move fromone site to anotherac- recently,Binford (1980) has distinguishedtwo exploitative cording to seasonal fluctuationsin food resources. Group strategiesamong hunter-gatherersfor which the presenceor migrationsgenerally follow natural rhythms and oftenrepro- absenceof storageis a relevantfactor. duce those of previousyears. At each period of the year the 2. A highpopulation density. Storing hunter-gatherers may group settlesin a location to tap the resourcesknown to be be expectedto have a peculiardemographic structure. In order bountifulin thisspecific place at thisparticular time: when this to clarifythis point, we mustbegin by consideringtheir settled resourcebecomes scarce, another is sought,thus calling fora way of life. camp shift.Two exceptionsto thisrule can be postulated.The Amongmobile hunter-gatherers, women have twomain tasks. firstoccurs when the differentresources exploited throughout As producers,they are in chargeof plant gathering,a basic the year are geographicallyconcentrated in the same area, so food-gettingactivity sometimes providing more than half of that the group can exploit them froma single base camp the total foodsupply. As reproducers,they not onlybear but (Watanabe 1968: 72; King 1974:40). The secondhas its foun- also care forchildren: they breast-feedand carrythem until dation in the practiceof storage: if a resourceis sufficiently theyare about fouryears old. The workload of a womanwith abundantto be harvestedand storedon a sc?alelarge enough to more than one infantwould be so heavy as to interferewith feedthe group until the next harvest, the group can settledown. food-gettingactivities requiring a highdegree of mobility.This Thus, the accumulationof substantialfood reserveshas a mobilityis considered(Birdsell 1968:236; Lee 1972) one of the double effecton the residencepattern: on the one hand, it majorexplanatory factors for birth spacing (three to fiveyears inhibitsthe possibilityof residentialmobility; on the other,it betweensuccessive births) among nomadic hunter-gatherers. suppressesits necessity.Except in the case of geographicalcon- The SKungBushmen say that "a womanwho gives birthlike centrationof resourcesmentioned above, wheneverresources an animal to one offspringafter another has a permanentback-

524 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Sat, 11 Jan 2014 17:10:33 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions ache." Lee (1972), who reportsthis saying, also calculatesthe Testart: FOODl STORAGE AMONc TTTTNTER-rGATTERERS workeffort of a womaninvolved in foodgathering according to differentintervals between births and convincinglyargues that, Nikitin1966, quoted by Beaucage 1976:398) and Marxistsof withshorter intervals, the numberof infantsto be carriedin- all persuasions(Suret-Canale 1969:106; Mandel 1962:26, 43; creasesand the workload rapidlybecomes unbearable. We do Beaucage 1976:409-10). not need to specifyhere the natureof the mechanismsregulat- This view,however, can no longerbe maintained,for quan- ing such birthspacing: abortion or contraception,postpartum titativestudies (e.g., Lee 1968, 1969) show that,contrary to taboo or otherprohibitions on sexual intercourse,possible inhi- whathas generallybeen assumed,hunter-gatherers do not work bitionof fertility occasioned by prolongedlactation, infanticide, hard to make a living.Sahlins (1972: chap. 1) has popularized childmortality, and so on. What we are concernedwith is that these findingsby referringto hunter-gatherersocieties as one or several of these mechanisms,whatever they may be, "affluentsocieties." If a hunterneeds to workonly three or four exist,that theyare broughtabout by a mobileway oflife, and hoursa day on the average to ensurehis subsistence,he would that theyaccount forthe low populationdensity of nomadic need to workonlv a littlemore to createa surplusproduct and hunter-gatherers. lay the basis forthe exploitationof one man by another. From theseconsiderations, it followsthat the adoptionof a Thus one cannotso easilyexplain why hunting-and-gathering sedentaryway oflife will be sufficientto triggera demographic societiesare classless, egalitarian,and based on generalized expansion.This idea has been widelyacknowledged by scholars reciprocity.The explanationin termsof surplus definitely has to studyingdemographic change throughspecific case studies be replaced by a new one. Moreover,not all hunting-and- concernedeither with hunter-gatherersundergoing accultura- gatheringsocieties are egalitarian,and thistoo will have to be tion,such as Bushmen(Lee 1972:329), AustralianAborigines accountedfor. Northwest Coast societies,for instance, are rank (Harris 1977b: 412-14), and Eskimos (Binfordand Chasko societies,and, although to a lesser extent,stratification or 1976), or with prehistoricgroups (Dumond 1972b: 311) and wealthdisparities are reportedfrom various groups of hunter- throughthe elaboration of broad evolutionary models (Dumond gatherersin Californiaand Siberia. It seemsthat only nomadic 1972a: 290-91; Harris 1977a: 188-97; 1977b; Reed 1977a: hunting-and-gatheringsocieties which do not practiceintensive 551; 1977b:894-95). storage are egalitarian, while importantsocial inequalities The consequencesof storage for population densityhave similarto those exhibitedin agriculturalsocieties are present already been noted (Bartholomewand Birdsell 1953:488; among sedentary,food-storing hunter-gatherer societies. This Birdsell 1968:230; Smith 1972:8; Hassan 1975:32). I assume preliminaryevidence suggests that the relevantfactor for the that theyhave not been moreregularly invoked only because developmentof inequalitiesis not the presenceor absence of of the underestimationof the importanceof storagein non- agriculture,but the presenceor absence of a storingeconomy, agriculturalcontexts. On the one hand, Liebig's law stipulates whetherit be hunting-gatheringor agricultural.How both a that the populationlevel in a specificcommunity is regulated settledway of lifeand intensivefood storing are likelyto lead not by the yearlytotal amountof exploitedresources, but by to the emergenceof socioeconomicinequalities is what remains the smallestquantity of foodavailable duringthe leanestsea- to be explained. son: storageis a meansof increasingthe latter, thus allowing a In thefirst place, sedentarism is a prerequisiteto theaccumu- rise in the populationlevel. On the otherhand, if a natural lation of materialgoods. XVhilethe developmentof means of resourceis available onlyduring a shortspan of time,however transportationmakes ownership of material wealth compatible, bountifulit maybe it willhelp feed the community only for this to a certain extent,with a nomadic way of life, generally periodunless it is stored.If storageis practiced,however, the speakinghunter-gatherers travel on footand carrytheir loads same resourcewill provide a staple food for a much longer themselves.Thus, wealth is generallylimited to light,easily period of time: accordingly,it will be exploitedmuch more transportablepossessions. Apart from the implements, weapons, intensively,thus increasingthe yearly total amount of food and tools requiredfor subsistenceactivities, possessions are available to the community.The high population densities mainlyconfined to clothesor bodily ornaments:belts, head- recordedfor some hunting-and-gatheringgroups have com- bands, necklaces,armbands, pendants, labrets, and so forth. monlybeen explainedwith referenceto the generosityof the Otheritems regarded as preciousoften pertain to tools even if naturalenvironment. The latteris an obviousprerequisite, but, theyhave no functionalvalue, such as carefullychipped spear- whennature's abundance is onlyseasonal, as on the Northwest heads or painstakinglypolished axes. The incompatibilityof Coast, high population densitiesare best explained by the nomadismand materialwealth has been underlinedby Sahlins presenceof a storingeconomy. (1972:11-12). Owen Lattimore'scomment "The pure nomad To sum up, sedentarismtriggers population increase, and is the poor nomad," althoughreferring to pastoralists,applies intensivefood storage enables the populationto stabilizeat a as well to hunter-gatherers. higherlevel of density. Sedentarizationmakes possiblethe accumulationof an un- 3. Socioecontomicintequalities. The Neolithic Revolutionis limitednumber of lightand portablegoods. It also permitsthe believedto have paved the way forcivilization, class society, developmentof heavy and nontransportableequipment for food and thestate. The basic assumptionis alwaysthat only agricul- processingand food storage.The AustralianAborigines leave turewas able to generatea regulareconomic surplus sufficient theirlarge grindingslabs behindwhen theymove, along with to maintaina nonproductiveclass, such as priests,warriors, small stocksto whichthey come back in timeof need. Village bureaucrats,and the like. This idea was clearly stated in life,on theother hand, allows the multiplication of mortars and Childe's works (e.g., 1954:41-48) and has since become com- grindingstones. It allows also the fabricationof containersof monplace. The argumenthas been taken over by Marxist all shapes and dimensions:in someplaces, thereis an unprece- writers.The keynotion is thatof surplusproduct, i.e., produc- denteddevelopment of basketry; in otherspottery is adoptedor tionbeyond the needsof theproducers. Hunter-gatherers, who are said to be perpetuallyin quest of food,supposedly have invented;everywhere, granaries, storage pits, or otherstorage no timeto producea surplus.According to thisview, it is only bins appear. To all this technicalequipment, which may also withthe development of the productive forces brought about by conferprestige on thosewho use it, we must add fixedassets. agriculturethat the productionof a surplusbecomes feasible, The simplelean-to or windbreak,the branchhut, or the tent, therebyopening the way forpossible control of thissurplus by the typicaldwellings of nomads,are replacedamong sedentary a class ofnonproducers and thusgiving birth to theexploitation groupsby elaboratehouses which in some cases requirea con- of one man by anotherand class societies.In a nutshell,this is siderableamount of work as faras woodcutting and transporta- the currentview of Soviet writers(Kajdan n.d.:51-52, 56-57; tionof slabs are concerned.Other buildings, such as magnificent Vol. 23 * No. 5 * October1982 525

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Sat, 11 Jan 2014 17:10:33 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions ceremonialhouses or ostentatioustombs, foreshadow the large- goods stretchesto an unprecedentedextent the possibilitiesof scale publicworks so frequentin otherhistorical contexts. exchangeand giftand thus enhancesthe advantagesof accu- Whilesedentarism may bringan increasein materialwealth, mulatingfood. Great quantitiesof goods can thenbe accumu- it does notnecessarily do so. In contrast,large-scale food storage lated forredistribution in theremote future or forlong-distance does entail such an increase,since it convertsthe productsof trade: the volume,area, and durationof the circulationof the huntingand gathering,that is, the bulk of the total outputof goods take on differentdimensions. No wonder,then, that the a hunting-gatheringeconomy, into lastinggoods. Thus it be- old customof food givingmanifests itself most stronglyin a comesconceivable to hoard food: in the historyof mankind,a societypracticing large-scale storage. fullgranary has alwaysbeen the most obvious sign of its owner's We have seenthat the accumulation of wealth is madepossible wealth.Furthermore, once foodcan be preserved,its accumula- by sedentarism,realized by the transformationof food into tion,even over and above theneeds it is meantto satisfy,is not lasting goods, and renderedpotentially unlimited by the ex- absurd. changeablenature of storedfood. This last point is especially However,while the advantages of accumulatinggrain are important,since only those who have at theirdisposal an excess obvious to people in our society,it is a differentmatter among can be classifiedas "rich." This bringsus to economicinequali- hunter-gatherers.What can be donewith an excessof well-pre- ties. These can only develop with the existenceof material servedfood? We cannotreply that its ownercan keepit forlater goods,but suchgoods cannot engender a differentiationbetween use, sincedefining it as excessmeans that his presentand future richand poor if theyare appropriatedby the communityas a needsare alreadytaken care of. He can pile it up; however,in whole. This is generallythe case among nomadic hunter- spiteof the fact that food can sometimesbe keptfor a verylong gatherersas faras foodis concerned:indeed, there is a universal time, pests and other natural agents will eventuallyget the rule whichstipulates that the productsof huntingand, to a betterof thisprecarious treasure. He can exchangeit forother lesserextent, those of gatheringmust be sharedby all members goods. Such exchangecan occur with foreigngroups living in of thecommunity. The social relationsprevailing among people differentenvironments and exploitingdifferent natural re- whostore food must therefore be radicallydifferent iftheir food sources. Generallyspeaking, however, for this exchange to reservesare to be privatelyappropriated. In orderto account become regularand of some magnitudeit has to take place forthis difference,we will investigatethe connectionbetween withinthe communityitself, and thispresupposes two things: social relationsand thepractice of storage. first,other members of the groupmust want to acquire food, Food sharingamong nonstoringhunter-gatherers is linked whichmeans they do nothave it,and second,they must possess withthe material basis of thesociety. First, the hunter who has goodswhich the owner of excess food does notproduce. In other shotmore game thanhe needscan onlygive whathe cannoteat words,it impliesa socialdivision of labor within the community to othersfor fear of wasting it. This wouldappear to be a truism itselfand not only betweenregions. In a differenthistorical only if we overlookthe fact that the rule of sharingapplies contextthan that of hunter-gatherers orpristine agriculturalists, mostlyto big game and tendsto be disregardedin the case of bronzemetallurgy represents the first significant social division smallanimals. Second, as a resultof theenforcement of therule of labor and providesa type of durable wealthwhich can be of sharing,the empty-handedhunter can hope fora sharefrom keptmuch longer than any foodstuff.These social and technical the morefortunate one. Food sharingfunctions, therefore, as a noveltiesgive hoardingits fullmeaning, and, indeed,the Euro- kind of social insuranceagainst bad luck. Here again, we ob- pean Bronze Age witnessesthe accumulationof treasures.In servethat the rule applies more to haphazardactivities such as the absence of metallurgy,however, the primitivehoarder can huntingthan to moreregular activities such as gathering.I do exchangehis food excess for various products: stone blades, furs, not intendto reducethe rule of sharingto thesematerial con- shells,hammered coppers, and otherrare items made by part- siderationsonly: on the contrary,I thinkthat the ostentatious timespecialists or importedfrom distant regions. These luxury characterit assumesamong many hunter-gatherers aims above objects, devoid of any practicalvalue, are usefulonlv in the all at displayingthe specificnature of the social relationspre- sense that theyconcentrate a large exchangevalue in a small vailing in a society based on cooperation.However, these volume,thus beingeasily stored.In fact,their use value is to material considerationsdo plav a part. When storage has conferprestige on their owner. There is, however,another becomea commonpractice, it makessense for the hunter not to meansof convertinga foodexcess into prestige, namely, giving shareand to keep his game forhimself. Food reservesthen con- it away withoutimmediate return. The giftcreates an obliga- stitutea kind of insurancefor the futureand a regulating tion forthe receiver,and thereforethe givermay expectreci- mechanismwhich diminishesthe advantages of sharing.In procityeven ifit is postponed.Moreover, beyond this calculat- orderto offsetan eventualshortage, people relymore on their ing strategy,the prestigegained by the donorallows him to foodstocks than on thehelp of others or on thesolidarity which establishhis ascendancyover his peers. links themto each other.We may thereforeexpect that food Such a developmentis intimatelyconnected with a tradition sharingwill tend to fall into disuse with the developmentof of food sharingcommon among nonstoringhunter-gatherers: intensivefood storage. the foodbrought back to the camp by the hunteris totallyor In thiscontext it is importantto underlinethe total change partiallyshared out, thus bringingprestige to the successful in mentalitybrought about by the adoption of food storage. hunter.This custom,however, acquires a differentmeaning Amongnomadic people such as the Bushmen,accumulation or when food is stored.Among nonstoring people, the only way storagehas the immoralconnotation of hoarding(Lee 1969: excessfood can be used is to giveit away. Amongstoring people, 75). In societiesin whichsharing is the rule,goods mustcircu- on the contrary,it can be individuallyappropriated by the late amongall membersof the groupfor immediate consump- producerinsofar as it can be convertedinto a lastingproduct: tion.Thus the decisionto storefood implies a changein ideol- in thiscontext the prestigetied to a giftof foodhas an utterly ogy: a change in customs(the rule of food-sharinghas to be differentquality. It is thequest for prestige which is theprimary either transformedor given up), in attitudes towardsother motivationof thisact, sincethe goods given could be profitably people (less relianceon kinship,affinity, or friendshipto secure kept by theirowner. Because of the part played by prestige, the future),in attitudestowards time (the past, that is, the the customof food givingtakes on a very differentmeaning goods alreadyaccumulated, is of greaterconsequence than the among food-storingpeople. There is anotherbasic difference. presentfor ensuringsubsistence), in attitudestowards work Perishablefoodstuffs that have notbeen processed for preserva- (work investedin the means of production,such as storage tioncan be givenonly to thosewho have an immediateneed for facilitiesor stocks,may proveto be of greaterimportance than it and who do not live too far away or can be reached in a present capacity to work), and in attitudes towardsnature reasonabletime. The transformationof foodstuffsinto lasting (people relymore on theresults of theirown past workthan on

526 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Sat, 11 Jan 2014 17:10:33 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions ever-providingnature). Nomadic hunter-gatherersconsider Testart: FOOD STORAGE AMONG HUNTER-GATHERERS storagesuperfluous insofar as theytrust the generosity of nature to supplythem with wild resourcesat any time.Nature is, as constraint,and it is likelythat no large-scaleexploitation origi- Marx said, "their primitivestore of foods." A Dene hunter nated withthis daily form. Therefore, exploitation among non- states: "Whites always have moneyin the bank. I will never storinghunter-gatherers can only be sporadicand limited.It have any. All I can put aside is in natureand it allows me to may occur only betweenpeople of the same local group or, make a living.This is my bank. This is my savingsaccount" perhaps,among a small numberof kin living far fromeach (Berger1977: 101, translationmine).2 Thus storageexpresses a other.Moreover, it may occur only on rare occasions,so that distrustof nature,and whenevernature is viewedas a divinity the amountof workremains within reasonable limits. On the whose blessingand unlimitedgenerosity is praised the act of otherhand, large-scalepreservation of food makes it possible storingis irreverentor sacrilegiousat the same timeas it con- to exceedthe limits of this daily exploitation. Stocks are already stitutesin thesocial ordera transgressionof therule of sharing. at hand, and theirvery existenceprovides an opportunityfor In additionto a fundamentalalteration in ideologyand social the exploitationnot onlyof dailv labor,but of the entirelabor relations,storage is often,though not always,connected with a inputrequired for their accumulation. In brief,the extortion of tendencytowards the developmentof individualownership. a surplusproduct may be realizedon a verydifferent scale than Wherethere is individualproperty, the developmentof wealth amongnonstoring hunters and gatherers. leads to the emergenceof economicinequalities. Gould (1975: I have alreadysaid that,because stored food is a lastinggood, 149-50) opposesthe classicalhunter-gatherers who enforcethe thelonging for wealth may give rise to an intensificationof food rule of sharing to those who individuallyappropriate and productionbeyond the needs of theproducers. This intensifica- accumulateresources and goods. Amongthe latter,incipient tion is also a resultof the technicalrequirements of a storing or developedstatus or class hierarchiesare to be found,"since economy.Among nomadic hunter-gatherers,the equilibrium such accumulationsare generallyunequal and becomemore or betweenhuman needs and naturalresources is achievedthrough less concentratedin the hands of certainindividuals or fam- a flexibledaily adaptation. It is otherwisein the case of storing ilies." Sedentarismalso means an exclusiveor privilegedex- food-gatherers,whose well-beingduring the season of scarcity ploitationof the territoryin whichthe grouphas settled.Dis- dependson the food stockspreviously accumulated. This im- paritiesin resourcesbetween areas and the abandonmentof a plies some planning,but we cannotexpect hunter-gatherers to flexiblesocial structure,which implies high population pressure predictall the hazards likely to appear, such as, on the one for some groups,bring about differencesin wealth fromone hand, a possiblediminution of the amountof the storedfood, groupto another(Smith 1976:49-50). Sedentarismalso limits should a portionof it be destroyedby biological or climatic the possibilityof resolvingconflicts through splitting of local agentsor in warfare,and, on theother hand, an increasein the groups,hence the emergenceof mediation,a new opportunity needs to be satisfiedby thesestores, should other resources run forleaders to strengthentheir social position (Bender 1978: short,the next harvestbe delayed, or the size of the group 213). increase.Thus, in order to be preparedfor any eventuality, Up to thispoint, we have assumedthat wealth originates only therewill be a tendencyto storea littlemore than the quantity in thework of those who amass it. We nowhave to discusswhat usuallyneeded. This excessis as necessaryeconomically as, for may be viewed as the major source of social inequalities example,the seeds that the cultivatorputs aside forthe next throughouthistory, i.e., theexploitation of one man by another. sowing:it has use value forthe producer. Therefore, it does not We mustask whetheror not thepresence of a storingeconomy representa surplus(contrary to whatI have writtenelsewhere providesa basis forthe emergence of thisexploitation. [Testart 1979:183]), and thereis no reason to thinkthat any Whenconsumption is delayed,the productsstored acquire a surpluscould firstbe accumulatedand thendiverted from its certaindistance from the producers, and thisdistance seems to producers.The generationof a surplusabove the consumption foreshadowthe separation of producerand product that is needsof the producersand above the technicalprerequisites of typicalof class societies.The processof productionis not fol- productionis meaningfulonlv if it is aimed at themaintenance lowed by immediateconsumption; the appropriationof the of a class of nonproducers.Surplus and exploitationare indis- productby the produceris postponed.Further, it may never sociable.Now, the excessover the quantityusually needed will happen,since this product, transformed by adequate techniques be utilizedas foodonly in the case of an unexpectedcalamity. of preservation,has become a lastinggood whichcan be ex- At the end of a good year, this excess will not have been con- changedand handledand withwhich the produceror someone sumed.It will neverthelesshave been usefulto the extentthat else can "play." The longerthe period of conservation, the more it has servedas insuranceagainst calamities. Since this function opportunitiesthere are to divertthe product from its producer: willnot have destroyedit, it is available forother possible uses storedfood is theprimary object of raids,and it may be stolen, but withoutimmediate utility, since, according to our hypothe- monopolizedby menof highstatus, or made thesubject of rent sis, the foodneeds have been satisfiedand its role as insurance or tribute. has come to an end. Obviously,its ownercan hoardit, in keep- In some nomadic societies,for instance,in Australia,the ing with the tendencyI have already mentioned;but, to the eldersenjoy special privilegeswith regardto food,men have extentthat thisexcess is withoutimmediate usefulness, it may similarprivileges in oppositionto women,or individualsare be one of the firstproducts appropriated by personswho did obligatedto makegifts of food to kinor affines:from these facts not produceit. This extortionwill be all the easier in that it it can be argued that some formsof exploitationmay exist does not requireany labor in additionto thatalready embodied among nomadichunter-gatherers. These formsof exploitation in the productand does not infringeon the abilityof the pro- will,however, be verylimited. For thisexploitation to become ducerto satisfyhis own basic needs. massiveand regular,in the absence of preservationof food,a In addition,the existenceof collectivestores provides an daily supplywould have to be surrenderedto those wishingto opportunityfor the emergenceof thisexploitation. People who exploitothers. Such day-to-dayexploitation is notunthinkable, are importantbecause of theirreligious status or theirkinship sinceinstances of worse forms of exploitation are known.These, controltheir however,all postdate the emergenceof classes and political ties will assume the managementof the stores, utilizationby membersof the community,preside over their redistribution,orient their use in accordancewith theirown 2 "Les Blancs ont toujours de l'argent a la banque. Moi, je n'en interestsor thoseof theirown group, and justifyboth theshare aurai jamais. Tout ce que je peux mettrede c6t6 se trouve dans la nature et me permetde subsister.C'est la ma banque. C'est 1a theyappropriate of thecommunal stores and theirpoor contri- mon compted'epargne." butionto it in termsof the importanceof theirfunction. Even- Vol. 23 * No. 5 * October1982 527

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Sat, 11 Jan 2014 17:10:33 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions tually,they will divert a shareof the stores to theirown personal Alaskan Eskimogroups, the Aleuts,the maritimeChukchi and ends. We are not concernedhere withwho controlsand how; Koryaks,the FinmarkLapps, some groupsin westernSiberia what I want to stressis that collectivestores can become the between the Ob and the Yenisei Rivers, the westernAtha- materialbasis forexploitation. bascans, the Plateau Indians,a fewgroups in the Great Basin Furthermore,exploitation is connectedwith the factthat an area, and perhapsthe Warrau of the Orinocodelta. More ex- economybased on storageentails sedentarism. Among nomadic amples are to be foundin recentpostglacial prehistory. The hunter-gatherers,the flexibilityof the social organization,the Natufiansin Palestineand Syriaare a case in point:their staple ease withwhich the groupsplits up, and the generalmobility foodwas derivedfrom wild cerealsstored in pits in permanent prevent exploitationfrom going beyond certain limits: the villages. exploitedmove away to settleelsewhere. Sedentary existence, Storinghunter-gatherers are absent (withone possibleexcep- permanentliving quarters, and storagefacilities all restrictthe tion) fromdeserts and tropicallands. The reasonis thatone or mobilityof people. Since the dissatisfiedcannot leave so easily, theother of the naturalprerequisites for the establishmentof a exploitationcan become more intensive.Sedentarization can storingeconomy is absent. As a rule,in deserts,natural food thusbe viewedas thefirst step towardsthe developmentof the resourcesare notbountiful, and, in thetropics, there is no period political constraintwithout which a fullydeveloped formof of extremescarcity and seasonalityis not markedenough to exploitationcannot be realized. inducestorage. As a result,storing hunter-gatherers are distrib- Thus all the material,social, ideological,or political pre- uted over the highand mediumlatitudes. Such areas are very requisitesfor the emergenceof social inequalitiesseem to be fewin numberin thesouthern hemisphere, and thismay be the presentin societieswith a storingeconomy. This view does not reason the storingeconomy does not occur there. Hunter- implyany determinismby the technicaland economicbasis, gathererspracticing intensive storage include mainlypeoples sinceone has to ask whyintensive storage is adoptedin thefirst thatare primarilyfishermen or plant gatherersand incidentally place, and I have brieflymentioned various factors pertaining Arcticsea hunters,but not peoples that are, firstof all, land to theideology or thenature of thesocial relationswhich either hunters.Whv land huntersdo not adopt such practicescannot slow down or speed up this process.Although I have stressed be discussedin anv detail here,but the likelyexplanation runs theimportance of technique,it is thepursuit of wealthand the as follows:In the specificcase of the Arcticregions, freezing will to increaseinequality and exploitationthat determines the providesan easy way of preservingfood. In otherareas the intensificationof food productionabove basic needs. This long-termpreservation of animal fleshrequires more elaborate determination,however, requires that food first be transformed processingthan that neededfor fish and muchmore than that into lasting goods by adequate preservationtechniques. We needed forgrains or nuts. This differencein labor inputprob- have paid attentionto the materialbasis inasmuchas it makes ably explainswhy, although techniques for the preservationof possiblecertain social developments.Only a concreteanalysis game are widelyknown and occasionallypracticed, there is no of specificcases will tell us whetheror not thesedevelopments land hunting economy based on large-scale storage. This actuallyoccur in a givensociety. This analysiswill call forthe phenomenonhas significanttheoretical consequences. If we establishmentof the degreeof sedentarismand the importance considerthe hunter-gatherersof the worldin the ethnographic ofstorage, the examination of thevarious structures, economic, present,excluding those inhabiting desert and tropicalareas as political,or ideological,and theassessment of the various social wellas thosefor whom land huntingprovides the major source forcesfor the specificsociety under study. Inequalities can offood, we findthat almost all are of thestoring type. They can develop only with the separationof privilegedsocial classes in no way be viewedas exceptions. fromother strata that are disadvantaged,exploited, subjected, or reducedto slavery,the interests of the one beingantagonistic to thatof the other. It is upon thecarrying out ofthese struggles DISTINGUISHING STORING HUNTER-GATHERERS that the level of social differentiationof a societyat a specific IN A SAMPLE OF 40 SOCIETIES pointin its historydepends. The idea of using the cross-culturalcodes to test the views EXAMPLES AND GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION presentedabove originatesdirectly from the publicationby Murdockand Morrow(1970) of a set of codes and a body of Elsewhere (Testart n.d.) I have attemptedto identifythe coded culturaldata pertainingto foodpreservation and storage hunter-gathererspracticing intensive storage. Here I shall in 186 societies.I selectedthe hunting-and-gatheringsocieties brieflysummarize my main conclusions.The best examples fromthese 186 societies. Since Murdock and White (1969) come fromthe NorthwestCoast Indians, the peoplesof south- considerthese latter "a representativesample of the world's easternSiberia and northernJapan (Ainu, Gilyaks,Itelmens, known cultures,"it is likely that the sample taken here is and others), and the CaliforniaIndians: various species of representativeof the hunter-gatherersof the world. migratorysalmon provide the bulk of the foodin the firsttwo Out of these 186 societies,I selected as hunting-gathering cases, and, in the thirdhighly seasonal acornsare the staple. societiesonlv thosein whichagriculture and animalhusbandry All thesepeoples possess importantstorage facilities, either in are not practicedor are unimportant,i.e., yieldless than 10% special buildingssuch as the pile granariesin Californiaand of the local foodsupply (in Murdockand Morrow[1970] these Siberia or in various containerskept inside houses as on the societiesare coded 0, N, or U in thesecond and thirdcolumns). NorthwestCoast. All are essentiallysedentary in thesense that The societyof Manus has been excludedbecause of the crucial theylive in truevillages with permanent dwellings, from which importanceof intercommunitytrade. The resultis a sample of they may undertakeperiodic expeditionsbut in which they 40 societies. spend most of the year. Their population densityis much Murdockand Morrow (1970:306) distinguish"5 particular higherthan is consideredstandard among hunter-gatherers: in configurationsof ecologicaland technicalconditions together America northof Mexico, for example,the culturalarea in with types of adjustment to each." The set of codes they whichpopulation density is the highestis not an agricultural elaborateis shownin table 1 (fromwhich I omittheir Condition area, but a regionof hunter-gatherers,California, immediately 5, whichdoes not occur among hunter-gatherers).The codes followedby the NorthwestCoast. All these peoples exhibit attributedby Murdockand Morrowto each of the 40 societies socioeconomicinequalities, Northwest Coast ranks being but of our sample are reproducedin the firstcolumn of table 2. the best-knownexemplification of this tendency.Other more However, as far as Californiais concerned,it seems to me or less typicalinstances of storinghunter-gatherers are some necessaryto modifythe codes. By codingCalifornian societies

528 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Sat, 11 Jan 2014 17:10:33 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TABLE 1 Testart: FOOD STORAGE AMONG HUNTER-GATHERERS

CODES (SIMPLIFIED) FROM MURDOCK AND MORROW (1979) PERTAINING TO PRESERVATION AND STORAGE OF FOOD - -), thereis a correspondencebetween the presenceor ab- sence of preservationtechniques and ecological conditions. CONDITIONS Wherewe find- +, ecologicalconditions do not call forinten- 1 2 3 4 sive storage,but adequate preservationtechniques actually Food Re- exist: thisdoes not pose a problem,since storagemay be prac- Food Re- sources Food Re- ticedfor reasons other than immediate subsistence concern, for sources Variable sources instance,prestige or exchange.Where we find+ -, however, Food Re- Variable fromSea- Variable we have to explainwhy ecological conditions call forintensive SOCIETAL sources fromDay son to fromYear storagebut thereare no adequate preservationtechniques. Out ADJUSTMENTS Constant to Day Season to Year of fourteensuch cases, ten are societiesin whichland hunting Lacks significant providesmore than 35%7 of the total food supply: as mentioned, techniquesor has at best this seems to be sufficientto precludeany large-scalestorage. techniquesthat are In two cases (Arandaand Paiute) the environmentis desertic: barelyadequate ...... A E I 0 resourcesare certainlytoo scarce to induce intensivestorage. Has a few simple This probablyholds also forsome groups from the Plateau and techniquesadequate to tide over timesof the Subarctic. Either one of these reasons accounts for the shortage...... B F J P absence of a storingeconomy in the cases underexamination: Has techniquesfor the shouldit be too difficultto maintaina significantfood stock to accumulationof cope with the next season of scarcity,people would probably substantialsurpluses for prefernot to store at all and resortto the flexibleadaptive otherthan subsistence strategytypical of mobilehunter-gatherers. purposes ...... C G K Q Column6 containsthe codes forresidence patterns as given by Murdockand Wilson (1972). These are, in orderof increas- ing sedentarism,B, S, R, T, and P. We can easily verifythat as B, Murdockand Morrowclassify them in Configuration1, nonstoringsocieties are significantlymore nomadic than storing "Food ResourcesConstant." In fact,acorns, which represent ones: all of the formerare B, S, or R, while,of the ten latter, the staple food of Central CaliforniaIndians (e.g., Baumhoff eightare T or P and onlytwo are S. 1963), are seasonal: the gatheringof acorns lasts only one Column7 gives the codes forpopulation density as givenby monthin autumn.For the Pomo, forexample, Kniffen (1939: Murdockand Wilson: A, less than 0.2 personper square mile; 366) writes:"The midwintermonths were ones of little activity. B, from0.2 to 1 personper square mile;C, from1 .1 to 5 persons Generallythere was a sufficientsupplv of stored food to go with per square mile; D, from5.1 to 25 personsper square mile. thefresh game. However,there was an occasionalfamine when Leavingaside such islandersas the Andamanese,for which the the veryimportant acorn crop was a failure."Salmon, another calculationof thepopulation density is meaninglessand always staple food in northand northwesternCalifornia, is also sea- in excess,all othernonstoring societies exhibit population den- sonal. Seasonal variationsand storageappear to be essentialin sitiesA or B. Of the ten storingsocieties, six have population the wholeof aboriginalCalifornia (Testart 1981). ThereforeI densitiesC or D; theother four have lowerpopulation densities, have replaced code B with code J for the three Californian probablvbecause of the unfavorableenvironment of the high societies,Yurok, Pomo, and Yokuts. latitudesin whichthey are located. How do these codes allow us to detectstoring hunter-gath- Column8 reproducesthe EthnographicAtlas codes forclass erers?When the ecologicalconditions are constantover time stratification:0, absenceof significant class distinctionsamong (codes A, B, C), thereis little need forstorage, and a minus freemen;W, wealthdistinctions; D, dual stratificationinto a appears in the second columnof table 2. When techniquesare hereditaryaristocracy and a lowerclass. Societieswhich are not lackingor barelyadequate (codes A, E, I, 0), intensivestorage of the storingtype have no stratificationexcept in two cases. is unlikely,and a minusappears in the thirdcolumn. A storing Of the ten storingsocieties, eight are stratified. economy can only arise when it is simultaneously required by The main resultsof the above discussionare summedup in seasonal variations and made possible by adequate techniques. thelast fourcolumns: These conditions,though necessary, are not sufficient.We have Column9, Storage:+ when+ at the same timein columns2, already noted that no storing economy occurs where land hunt- 3, and 5, - in the oppositecase ingis the primarysubsistence activity. The importanceof land Column10, Sedentarism:+ T or P, -B, S, or R huntingin each societyof the sample is indicatedin column4 Column11, Population:+ C or D, -A or B bv the figurepertaining to this activitygiven by the Ethno- Column 12, Stratification:+ W or D, - 0 graphicAtlas (Murdock1967). Whenthis figure is greaterthan In conformitywith the main expectationsof our dichotomi- 3, whichmeans more than 35% dependenceon land hunting. zation of hunting-gatheringsocieties, we findthat each row I have assumed that the storingeconomy is impossibleand correspondingto a society which is not of the storingtype entered a minus in column 5. Societies can be expected to be of exhibitsa majorityof minussigns in these last fourcolumns. the storingtype only when there is a plus in each of columns2, Still leavingaside the Andamanese,there are only threecases 3, and 5. This occurs in the followingcases: Ainu, Gilyak, with one plus sign: Ingalik, which belongs to the western AthabascanSubarctic area, and Klamath and Kutenai, which Aleuts, Eyak, Haida, Bellacoola, Twana, Yurok, Pomo, are located on the Plateau. This illustratesthe fact that, in Yokuts, and Kutenai. Leaving aside the last case, whichis a theseareas, the storingeconomy, although not prevalent,does doubtful the one, firstten cases are typical storing food-gather- occur. The rowscorresponding to the storingsocieties have a ing societies.I shall referto theseten cases as storingsocieties. majorityof plus signsexcept for the two southeasternSiberian With one exception,these societies are in Configuration3, and northernJapanese societies, Ainu and Gilyak.These appear "Food ResourcesVariable from Season to Season"; onlyGilyak to be atypical,but I wonderwhether the codes shouldnot be is in Configuration4, "Food ResourcesVariablefrom Year to revised.For instance,Gilyak society can certainlynot be con- Year" (whichdoes notmean that there is no seasonalvariation). siderednonstratified. Black (1973:77) describeswealth accu- Where the signs in columns2 and 3 are the same (+ + or mulationas a significantaspect of the society: "Individual

Vol. 23 * No. 5 * October1982 529

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Sat, 11 Jan 2014 17:10:33 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions TABLE 2

DATA RELEVANT TO THE STORING ECONOMY FOR A SAMPLE OF 40 FOOD-GATHERING SOCIETIES

C, 0 c? i bD 4 ;, 4 = e g = G 1Hi E

c/)~ ~ Q,~ C/) C/ C/)

! Kung ...... A - - 2 + B A 0-J Hadza ..... A - - 5 - B B 0O Mbuti.. A ... - ..- . 3 .. + B B 0 O Semang ...... A - - 3 + B A 0 - - Andamanese .. B - + 2 + S C 0 - - Vedda ...... E + - 3 + S A 0 - - Badjau ...... B + B A 0 - - A B Tiwi ...... A - - 3 + B B 0 - - Aranda ...... E + - 4 - B B 0 - - *Ainu ...... J + 3 + T B 0 + + *Gilyak ...... P + + 3 + S A 0 + Yukaghir ..... E + - 5 - B A 0 Ingalik ...... C - + 4 - R A W *Aleut ...... J + + 3 + T D D + + Copper ...... F + + 4 - S A 0 - - Montagnais ... I + - 6 - S A 0 - - Micmac ...... I + - 5 - S A 0 - - Saulteaux .... + - 4 - S A 0 - - Slave ...... F + + 5 - R B 0 - - Kaska ...... I + - 4 - S A 0 - - *Eyak ...... K + + 3 + T A W + + + *Haida ...... K + + 2 + T B D + + + *Bellacoola .... K + + 2 + P C D + + + + *Twana ...... J + + 3 + S C W + + + *Yurok ...... + + 1 + P C W + + + + *Pomo ...... J + + 3 + T C W + + + + *Yokuts ...... J + + 3 + T D W + + + + Paiute ...... I + - 3 + S A 0 Klamath ..... I + - 2 + S B W Kutenai ...... K + + 3 + S A 0 Gros Ventre . . B - + 8 - B A 0 Comanche .... J + + 9 - B A 0 Chiricahua . . J + + 4 - B A 0 Warrau ...... E + - 3 + S B 0 Siriono ...... E + - 5 - S A 0 Botocudo ..... E + - 4 - B A 0 Shavante ..... A - - 3 + S A 0 Aweikoma .... I + - 6 - B A 0 Tehuelche .... E + - 7 - B A 0 Yaghan ...... A - - 2 + B B 0

* Storing societies. property,especially the class of prestigegoods, the shagund, between storinghunter-gatherers and agriculturalistslies in gave a man statusin the community." whetherthe staple foodspecies are wild or domesticated:this provesto be onlya minordifference, since it does not affectthe main aspects of society.Agriculturalists and storinghunter- CONCLUSIONS gathererstogether are neatlyin oppositionto nonstoringhunt- er-gatherers.The conclusionto be drawnis that it is certainly What are the theoreticalimplications of a categoryof storing not the presenceof agricultureor its absence whichis the rele- hunter-gatherers?The adoptionof an agriculturalway oflife is vant factorwhen dealing with such societies,but ratherthe currentlyconsidered a turningpoint in historycomparable in presenceor absenceof an economywith intensive storage as its importanceto the IndustrialRevolution: hence, the notionof cornerstone. "Neolithic Revolution"associated with Childe's works.This conceptionhas its rootsin the idea that thereis a neat opposi- tion betweenhunter-gatherers and agriculturalist-pastoralists, the basis of thisopposition being the presence or absenceof the domesticationof plants and animals. Now, storinghunter- Comments gatherersocieties exhibit three characteristics-sedentarism, a highpopulation density, and thedevelopment of socioeconomic byRICHARD G. FORBIS inequalities-whichhave beenconsidered typical of agricultural Departmentof Archaeology,University of Calgary,Calgary, societies and possible only with an agriculturalway of life. Alta.,Canada T2N 1N4. 30 III 82 Furthermore,their economic cycle-massive harvestand inten- Testarthas presentedan intriguingcase forthe importanceof sive storage of a seasonal resource-is the same as that of storingfoods both among agriculturalistsand among certain societies based on the cultivationof cereals. The difference groupsof hunter-gatherers.I am, however,in total disagree- 530 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Sat, 11 Jan 2014 17:10:33 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions ment with his statementthat the differencebetween storing Testart: FOOD STORAGE AMONG HUNTER-GATHERERS wild and storingdomesticated foods is "minor."Childe's view that the cultivationof plants was a turningpoint in human societies.Testart's portrayal of the use ofsurplus as "extortion" historystill holds, in my opinion. Clearly,storage is a con- is a greatdistortion of incipientstratification. Few egalitarian comitantof agriculture.To the best of my knowledge,how- communitieswould permitextortion. Rather, positive incen- ever,no culturehas attaineda state of "civilization"without tivesforming a symbioticrelationship in whichall membersof agriculture,while, as Testart notes, thereare many societies communitiesprofited were almost certainly the major motiva- thatstored food without practising agriculture. tionfor the initialproduction of surplusfood. Testart asserts that peoples who stored food are in neat I must also registerstrong disagreement with the idea that oppositionto nonstoringhunters and gatherersand that these sedentismproduced major population increases. As this is differencesare reflectedin sedentism,social stratificationbased treatedelsewhere (Hayden 1981), I will not go into details on wealth,and populationdensity. These are featuresthat he here.I have furtherreservations about the statisticalmanipu- apparentlyconsiders to be the "main aspects' of society lations of the hunter-gathererdata, but I think Testart's (withoutreally saying why). It seemsto me that certainintel- majorpoints are basicallycorrect. lectualachievements (e.g., writing)and technologicaladvances My principalreservation concerning this article is that by (e.g., steel-making)might qualify, but I assume that he con- overemphasizingthe importanceof storage and by defining siders his factorsto be fundamental.These "main aspects" the conditionsgiving rise to agricultureand stratifiedsocieties may be examined in relationto the Blackfootof the early in termsof a "storing-type"economy with "storage as its historicperiod (beforethe bison had been virtuallyextermi- cornerstone,"it leads readers to view storage as the only nated). The Blackfoot were most certainlynot sedentary, importantvariable worth looking at rather than as only exceptduring the hard wintermonths, and populationdensity symptomaticof muchmore fundamental changes in the infra- on the NorthernPlains was low relativeto that of manyother structureof the societiesin question.Storage by itselfwill not regionsof NorthAmerica. In thesetwo respects,then, Testart get us veryfar in the searchfor the reasonsfor change in the can hardlybe faulted.It is clear,however, that the Blackfoot past, althoughit may be usefulfor monitoring those changes. had well-definednotions of wealth(in the formof horses)and of social stratification.They divided themselvesinto three social classes,rich, middle, and poor (Ewers 1955:240-45),and byTIM INGOLD were emphaticallynot egalitarians. Nor did theylive a hand- Departmentof Social Anthropology,University of Manchester, to-mouthexistence; they stored food. Pemmican,kept dry, Roscoe Building, Brunswick St., ManchesterMI3 9PL, could last foryears. It was compact,nutritious, and readily England.28 iii 82 transported.It was not designedfor immediate consumption. I welcome Testart's raising of the issue of storage among Probably monotonousas a day-by-daycomestible, it never- hunter-gatherers,but I consider his argumentprofoundly thelessreduced the threatof starvationand servedas a travel- wrong.As regardsthe relationbetween storage, sedentarism, linggrocery store, particularly for the wealthy,who had many and populationdensity, Testart reiteratestwo well-wornbut wivesto prepareit and manyhorses to cart it around. mistakenviews: that intensivestorage of basic foods is in- Testart may take the Blackfootcase as an exampleof an compatiblewith nomadic movement and thatsedentary settle- incipientstage of food storing,sharing some traitswith the ment promotesdemographic expansion by eliminatingthe food-storingsociety but not others.Or he may not. My in- need forwomen to space successivebirths. On the firstpoint, stincts,in any case, tell me that the Blackfootmore closely we have to refinethe conceptof nomadism.Storage may be in- resemblethe storinghunter-gatherers then they do the agri- compatiblewith a nomadismwhich recognizes no fixedpoints culturalists(and viceversa) and thatTestart's sharp dichotomy in the landscape, but in many cases hunter-gatherersmove betweenfood storers and nonstorersdoes not universallyapply arounda "circuit"of fixed points, each strategicallylocated for if storersmust necessarily be sedentarythroughout the year. the exploitationof particularresources in season. Oftensuch pointsare markedby permanentor semipermanentstructures, includingfacilities for storage. Substantialreserves may be byBRIAN HAYDEN lefton departurefrom each pointso that thereis foodto be had Departmentof Archaeology, Simont Fraser University, Burnaby, on arrivalthe next timearound. On the secondpoint, Testart B.C., Canada V5A 1S6. 5 iv 82 is not alone in confusingthe movemententailed in foraging Testart has drawn attentionto an importantaspect of the with that entailed in residentialrelocation. Permanent set- evolutionof stratifiedsociety. However, much of the article tlement,tied to intensivestorage, does not in itselfreduce presentsideas whichhave been currentin the literatureover the distancethat womenhave to walk as theygather food. It thelast decadeor two (Harris 1971and thenumerous references may have just the opposite effect.All it means is that they citedby Testart). In addition,in regardto the developmentof returneach day to the same point. Hence, if they have to social stratification,it seems that Testart is attemptingto carrytheir small childrenaround, there will be just as much claim a causal role forstorage, or at least a muchgreater role of an incentiveto space births. True, these pressuresare than I thinkit merits.Storage is certainlyhighly associated relaxed when,during seasons of scarcity,the group lives off with social stratification-indeed,it would be difficultto storedsupplies. But theremust be a periodof everyyear when imaginea stratifiedsociety without it. However,storage must supplieshave to be broughtin, and thenthere can be no relief be viewed as a necessaryrather than a sufficientcondition. forthe female gatherer who has morethan one infantto carry- There are hunter-gathererswho storelarge quantitiesof food unless the living resourcesare themselvesconcentrated int the yet are stronglyegalitarian (e.g., the Inuit and Athapaskan vicinityof the settlement. This, ratherthan the concentrationof groups).The real causal factors,as Testart himselfnotes, are harvestedresources in stores,is the preconditionfor demo- "the pursuitof wealthand the will to increaseinequality and graphicexpansion. exploitation,"resulting in "the intensificationof foodproduc- WhereTestart attempts to relatestorage to therise of social tion above basic needs." Storage and other factors(such as inequality,my disagreement with him is yetmore fundamental. resourceabundance, resource stability, and the potentialfor The cruxof his argumentis the suppositionthat intensive food individualcontrol over importantresources) only constitute storagemust tend to underminerelations of sharingand pro- the permissiveconditions for the expressionof the human mote the individualappropriation of reservesto the exclusion pursuitof wealthand power.I view thesetendencies as largely of othersin the community.Here Testartis at his mostequiv- being held in check by the majorityof the populace in most ocal. "I do not intend to reduce the rule of sharingto...

Vol. 23 - No. 5 * October1982 531

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Sat, 11 Jan 2014 17:10:33 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions material conditions only. . . . However, these material condi- costsand benefitsfrom one feedingperiod to another.However, tionsdo play a part." What part? "When storagehas become this transferdoes not necessarilyindicate an increasein sub- a commonpractice, it makessense for the hunternot to share sistenceand othersocial costs. For example,storing anadromous and to keep his game forhimself." Why? Testart,in common fishcould reducewinter, or even total year-round,subsistence withmost other writers on the subject,is confusingtwo quite costs. Assumingconstant cooking times,at least fourhours distinctmeanings of both sharingand storage. In its most (and possiblymore) could be spent processingevery hour's generalsense, sharing (in) refersto a social principlewhereby catchof fish for storage before its returnrate wouldbe reduced the resourceson whicha communitydepends are to be enjoyed to that of wintersmall game hunting(Perlman 1976, 1980). collectively.In a more litnitedsense, sharing(out) refersto Storingthis resource could be beneficial. the distributionof food fromhand to hand throughoutthe Storage does, as Testart states, provide a subsistencebase community:in this sense only does it representan aggregate forthe formation of larger, sedentary groups. This combination, of generalizedreciprocities. Material factorssuch as the size, however,does not indicatean increasein social costs. Testart rarity,and concentrationof game will affectthe degree to definestranshumant groups as flexible,capable of livingon a whichharvested produce must be shared out foreveryone to day-to-daybasis. In contrast,storing groups are rigidlyfixed have a share in what nature has to offer.The fact that, as in space, and withoutcareful planning of activitiesthey may Testart remarks,small and abundant animals which anyone perish. This dichotomyis misleadingand inaccurate. First, can catch are not usually shared out does not in the least transhumanceis not flexibleand unplannedbehavior. Groups infringeupon the principle of collective appropriationof shifttheir locations in accordancewith environmental rhythms natural resources.The same applies in the case of storage. (Lee and DeVore 1968). Failure to do so, particularlyin an When the supplyof basic resourcesis subject to pronounced environmentin whichresources are too scarce to store,may seasonal fluctuation,it is obviouslyprudent to store,and as be morecostly than failureto storesufficient amounts. Insuf- long as supplieslast thereis no need forfood to changehands. ficientstorage can be counteractedby switchingto lower- But if one person'ssupplies are exhaustedwhilst another has return-rateresources. In contrast,switching resources may somethingleft, the latter will be expectedto share out what not be possiblein an environmentwith scarce resources; there- remains.Thus thereis no contradictionbetween the practice fore,one mustmove to obtain the daily requirementof food. of storageand the collectiveappropriation of nature. Transhumanceis not a sign of a flexiblelife-style. Second, The contradictionis onlyapparent on accountof a confusion transhumanceis a labor cost which may involve others as betweenpractical and social senses of storage.The firstrefers well. Ecological and anthropologicalresearch suggests that to the settingaside of stocksof foodfor the future,which is a the benefitsof transhumancemay be outweighedby these functionof the schedulingin timeof resourceextraction and costs (Hirth 1977, Caraco and Wolf 1975, Perlman 1980, consumption.The second refersto the convergenceof rights Yesner 1977). Finally,larger sedentary groups are oftenmain- to specificresources (living or dead) upon a specificinterest tained by storage.What are the costs and benefitsof these and is governedby the perceptionof the scarcityof those largergroup sizes? A fewstudies suggest both that benefitsdo resourcesconceived as propertyor wealth.Only in this latter exist and that an optimalgroup size is much higherthan the sense is storageequivalent to hoarding,the directnegation of modal25 ofTestart's flexible and transhumanthunter-gatherer the principleof sharing.Practical storage does not in itself type. When relativeabundance exists,representatives of this representa transgressionof this principle,nor does it express typeform larger groups and becomesedentary (Carneiro 1967, any "distrustof nature,"on whosegenerosity hunter-gatherers Stewart1938, Harpending and Davis 1977). regardthemselves as dependenteven if theydo not consume Costs and benefitsexist for the factorson both sides of immediatelyall that they receive. From theirpoint of view, Testart's typology.I have focusedon the possibleadvantages whatis "irreverentor sacrilegious"is theattempt by particular of storageand associatedbehaviors, Testart on the disadvan- personsor groupsto appropriatefor themselvesthe worldof tages. Ultimately,a model is requiredwhich weighs the costs livingthings. Only whenman assumes custodianshipof living and benefitsof these factorssimultaneously. Just as storage natureis the social principleof sharingdisplaced by a principle can transferseasonal costs forfood, similar kinds of transfers of exclusiveor divided access to resources.This, and not the can be made by other componentsor betweenvarious com- merepractice of storage,introduces the possibilityfor hoarding ponentsof a social system.Slightly higher subsistence inputs and accumulation and underlies the emergenceof socio- mightreduce the system'stotal operatingcost. economicinequalities.

byDAVID L. POKOTYLO bySTEPHEN M. PERLMAN Departmentof Anthropologyanid Sociology,University of Departmentof Sociology/Anthropology,Virginia Commonz- BritishColumbia, 6303 N. W. MarineDrive, Vancouver, B.C., wealthUniversity, Richmond, Va. 23284, U.S.A. 13 iv 82 CantadaV6T 2B2. 22 iv 82 Few anthropologists,if any, would disagree with Testart. This paper is a valuable and in many ways stimulatingcon- Nonegalitariansocieties, including the hunter-gatherersin his tributionto our understandingof hunter-gathererlifeways and study,employ food storage.However, there is a gap between adaptations,although I disagreewith some of its assumptions a correlationlike Testart's and an explanation.Without an or arguments.I commendTestart for using the kind of ap- explanationfor the developmentof food storage, Testart's proach that explicitlyrecognizes diversity among hunter- correlationsproduce little more than anotherhunter-gatherer gatherers.The utilityof such a perspectivehas been demon- typology(Binford 1980, Service 1962,Lee and DeVore 1968). stratedby Martin (1974); it is a welcomeand much needed By describingtwo types of hunter-gatherersocieties, one change fromthe many attemptsto formulategeneral models flexibleand transhumantand theother rigid and sedentarywith of hunter-gathererband societiesthat eitherignore or explain foodstorage, he appears to suggestthat storingeconomies are away the "classic" exceptionsto the modal lifeway (e.g., alwaysa responseto subsistencestress. Food storage,therefore, Service 1962,Williams 1974, Jochim 1976). While Testart has implies the existenceof a labor-intensivesocial system. A been able to demonstratea dichotomybetween hunter- furtheranalysis of Testart's approach indicates that this is gathererspracticing intensive storage and those who do not, not necessarilytrue. this patternhas yet to be adequately explained.The implica- Populations are limitedby the season of minimumyield, tion hereis that ecologicaland social processesresponsible for unless that season's yield can be counteracted.A group can such differencescan best be understoodthrough comparative utilize storage to achieve this objective by transferringthe analysis of recenthunter-gatherers. Such a synchronic,classi-

532 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Sat, 11 Jan 2014 17:10:33 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions ficatoryapproach does have predictivevalue but is only a Testart: FOOD STORAGE AMONG HUNTER-GATHERERS partial solutionto the problemof what really is a dynamic processwhich requires the considerationof the archaeological cycle (Rowley-Conwyn.d.). Each higher-latitudeenvironment record.This problemhas beenrecognized by Ember(1978:447): is unique and mustbe independentlyevaluated with regard to "We need to discoverwhat predictsvariation among recent productivityand (particularly)risk. Considerationof such hunter-gatherers.And then, using archaeologicalindicators, factorssuggests a possibleframework within which ideological we need to discoverthe past prevalenceof those predictors factorsmight usefully be re-embeddedin the environment. and theirpresumed effects." While in basic agreementwith O'Shea (1981) demonstratesthat proximatemotivations for the hypothesizedrelationships of intensivestorage with settle- exchangedo not conflictwith the notion that such "social mentpatterns and demography,I am somewhatuncomfortable storage" can serve to redistributefood supplies in environ- with the social-inequalityexplanation, mainly because many mentsin whichproductivity is spatiallyand temporallyvari- of the variablesposited (e.g., ideationalvariables such as the able-i.e., that the broad contextof exchangemay be adapta- "longingfor wealth" and what seems to be regardedas an tion.His workprovides an exampleof how proximate causation innatetendency of the humanspecies to hoardwhen given the (such as Testart's"social divisionof labour" as an explanation chance) cannot be argued or objectivelydemonstrated from forexchange or, for that matter,ideological factors as an ex- an archaeologicalcontext. planationfor storage) can be fusedwith the moregeneral type From a more substantiveperspective, the delineationof a of causationargued for here to providemore generally applica- categoryof hunter-gathererspracticing intensive storage has ble modelsof humanbehaviour. importantimplications for archaeological studies. This lifeway is considerablyunderrepresented among recentgroups, given the loss of optimumhabitat, particularlyalong the Atlantic DAVID E. STUART and Pacificcoasts of NorthAmerica, through culture contact. by N.M. 87106, U.S.A. 12 iv 82 It probably had a broader distributionin prehistory.It is 308 GirardS.E., Albuquerque, unfortunatethat data for Salishan groups of the Canadian Testart's subject'is both interestingand fundamentallyim- Interior Plateau (Thompson, Shuswap, Lillooet) were not portant.He firstdefines, then uses the comparativemethod to available forcross-cultural analysis, as they would have pro- support differencesbetween storingand nonstoringhunter- vided a betterrepresentation of Plateau lifewaysand resolved gatherers.He views storinghunter-gatherer societies as struc- some of the problemspresented by the groupsincluded in the turalanalogs to agriculturalones and pointsout that it is the study. presenceof storage,not the modeof production, which permits transformationto stratifiedsociety. He showsthat a substantial literatureincorrectly tends to view most hunter-gatherersas byPETER ROWLEY-CONWY demographicallyconservative, egalitarian, and fullynomadic. 1 Clare Rd., CambridgeCB.3 9HN, England.29 iii 82 I agree with Testart's conclusionsin their most general Testart's articleprovides a valuable discussionof the dichot- sense but reject particularpoints of his argument.More im- omy betweenthose hunter-gatherers who storefood and those portantly,he failsto offeran unambiguousglimpse of how the who do not. Manv points emergesimilar to those raised by egalitarian,nonstoring hunter-gatherer is transformedinto Woodburn(1980), althoughTestart does not see the develop- the storingsociety. mentof storagepurely in Woodburn'sideological terms. En- Testart views both resourceabundance and seasonalityas vironmentalfactors are broughtin to supplementthe socio- essential to the food-storingsociety. Lack of seasonalityac- ideologicalones; but the insufficientintegration of these two countsfor the alleged scarcity of storing societies in the tropics. sets of factorsrenders Testart's discussiondifficult to convert He thenobserves that the storingsociety is seasonallylabor- into a generallyuseful model. intensivewhereas the "classic" hunter-gathereris not. While Food resourcesmust of course be both seasonal (so that periodiclabor peaks, temporarysurplus, and storageare more storage for later use is necessary)and abundant (so that a likely in a markedlyseasonal environment,stratified horti- sufficiencymay be taken and stored). Absence of resources culturalsocieties are not rare in tropicalareas. What, then, withthese attributes is held to account forthe rarityof more induceslabor intensityin those areas? Testart states,"seden- sedentary,food-storing economies among low-latitude hunter- tarismtriggers population increase, and intensivefood storage gatherers.Resources with the necessary attributes are available enablesthe population to stabilizeat a higherlevel of density." to most higher-latitudehunter-gatherers, and Testart argues This explanatorychain is weak,since it requiresone to conjure that factorsof ideology and social relationsare central in up a plausible cause forsedentism in "nonseasonal" environ- determiningwhether storage will occur.Ideological differences mentswhere it occurs. betweensocieties that do and do not storeare stressed;but it Too muchuncritical credit is givento classichunter-gatherer is symptomaticof the argumentas a whole that the quoted social techniqueswhich inhibitdemographic increase and to example of a society which regardshoarding as immoralis sedentism'sefficiency in lighteningthe demographic"load." the Bushmen: low-latitudehunter-gatherers are elsewhere When femalebody fat fallsbelow about 22% of body weight, stated not to hoard food because the environmentdoes not ovulationis eithersuppressed or irregular.Notable swingsin containspecies with the necessaryattributes. body fat are more typical of markedlyseasonal subsistence If we are to take a generalview of storage,the resources regimes.In those,food storage would minimizefluctuations in must be examinedin greaterdetail. It would be theoretically body fat and enhance raw fertility.Thereafter, sedentism possiblefor a groupto live on nothingbut, say, briefly available would act to suppresssocial techniquesof populationcontrol. Atlanticsalmon, storing sufficient to providefood throughout In thehuman male, insufficient dietary zinc willprevent viable the year. To do this would,however, be to renderthe group spermproduction in as littleas six months,and zinc deficiency vulnerable to interannualfluctuations-a bad salmon year is most commonin bulk vegetal diets. Any statementabout wouldbe disastrous.To guard againstrisks of thiskind, more "automatic demographicincrease" should read: if chronic sedentary,food-storing hunter-gatherers must be able to caloric insufficiencyis avoided, dietaryzinc is adequate, and exploitseveral migratorV species, so that fluctuationsin any unsanitaryconditions do not enhance infantmortality, then one of themare less of a problem.Storage of theseresources is sedentismand storage will likely triggera demographicin- added to the seasonal use of continuoulslyavailable local crease. Certainly,sedentism itself plays a role in demographic resources(e.g., deer among the Ainu or shellfishamong the increase,for canoe nomadslike the Yahgan are relativelyfree Tlingit) to plug gaps in the migratoryresource availability of the "transportproblem" and do bringforth more live births Vol. 23 * No. 5 * October1982

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Sat, 11 Jan 2014 17:10:33 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions per woman than neighboringterrestrial bands (Stuart 1980). sized,for instance, in thecase of theNorthwest Coast societies, Rather, the equation whichtransforms demographically con- and (2) thislabel servesto distinguishthe typeof societyI am servativepopulations into fecundones is much morecomplex dealingwith from other hunter-gatherer societies. than portrayedby Testart. We do not yet even possess the Several of the objectionsraised by the commentatorsstem fulldietary facts to refinethat equation. directlyfrom the fact that theyact as if I were dealing with Testart's discussion of "socioeconomic" inequalities is foodstorage in generalwhen I deal withit onlyin the precise overlyconcerned with materialgoods and thereforefails to sense definedat the beginningof my paper. Forbis, for in- consider an importantpoint. Not all nonstoringhunter- stance, mentionsthe case of the Plains Indians and wonders gatherersare egalitarian,for the most fundamentalform of whetheror not I would considertheir societies "food-storing social inequality is often present. Hunter-gatherersaward societies." Of course not. Even though the Plains Indians wives first,and plural wives nearly always, to successful practicefood storage, they do not constitutea storingsociety hunters.Thus, successfulhunting, polygyny, and enhanced as I have definedit. This is apparentin table 2, wherePlains reproductivepotential go togetherand formthe basis of in- Indians such as the Gros Ventreand the Comancheare classi- equality in hunter-gatherersociety. Unsuccessfulhunting, fiedas nonstoringsocieties. Among these Indians the prime sub- monogamyor celibacy, and limited reproductivepotential sistenceactivity is hunting,and I have alreadyindicated the formthe patternof the "underclass"among hunter-gatherers. probablereasons food storage cannot be intensivein sucha case. Hunting-not plant collecting-is the high-statusoccupation. The preparationof pemmicanis painstakingand time-con- One can argue that initiallythe uwtsuccessfulhunter and wife suming:"sun-dried slices of meat, poundedfine with a maul, would have collectedlow-status plant foodsand stored them were mixedwith melted fat, marrow, and the dry paste from against a poor season. Where this was the case, familiesof wild cherriesthat had been crushed,pits and all" (Lowie unsuccessfulhunters would have "sat out" a poor season, 1963:27); finally,this productis made compactand wrapped reducedtheir dependence on game, and opened up additional up. This preparation,which calls forvarious means of preser- space to successfulhunters. Once thatspace was yieldedto the vation (drying,mixing with fat, making compact, and so on), successful,necessity rather than the desire for wealth or aims at obtaininga high-qualityproduct: only the best parts prestigedictated continued seasonal storage.The unsuccessful of the buffaloare used to make pemmican,which can then hunterand wifewould have been more loath than othersto last for years (Gerard 1910:223-24; Wissler 1920:22; Driver practiceabortion and/or female infanticide, female labor being and Massey 1957:245). The amounts stored can only be so necessaryin the collectingseason. But they would have limitedcompared with those of the sedentarystoring hunter- lost daughtersat maturityto successfulhunters whose wives gatherers,Moreover, the purposesthese storesare meant to more oftenpracticed female infanticide. This, I argue, is the serve are differentfrom those of storinghunter-gatherers. On wedge of social inequalitywhich initially split classic hunter- theone hand,the fact that pemmican can last a verylong time gatherersociety asunder to produce both storingand non- seems to indicate a wish to reduce hazards in the years to storingpatterns (see Stuartand Gauthier1981). come ratherthan to providefood only during the nextseasonal In sum, I agree with Testart on the importanceof storage scarcity.On the otherhand, as Jenness(1932:50) noted, the and anthropology'sgenerally uncritical view of hunter- pemmicanis a kindof concentratedmeat (throughdesiccation gatherersociety as conservativeand egalitarian.I disagree and compression)that is easy to carryand perfectlysuited to about how one most fruitfullymodels the transformationof nomadichunters. that society.Surely, however, neither of us has had the final Ingold bringsup the case of nomadichunter-gatherers who wordon thissubject. "move around a 'circuit' of fixed points . .. often . . . marked by permanentor semipermanentstructures, including facilities for storage." Althoughhe presentsthis case as if it were a commonoccurrence, he does not give an example.Now, if it is indeed common for nomadic hunter-gatherersto move Reply arounda circuitof fixedpoints, they seldom leave "substantial reserves,"and I doubt whetherthere is a singlecase in which byALAIN TESTART we could talk of intensivefood storage.I have discussedelse- Paris, France.11 v 82 where (Testart 1981:185-86) the case of the Australian These commentsraise questionswhich may be groupedaround Aborigines,who occasionally leave behind small stores of threemain themes: (1) storage and economicstructure, (2) vegetableproducts that serve as "insurance"against adverse sedentarism,population density,and social inequalities,and circumstancesbut cannotunder any circumstancesinsure the (3) the relevanceof storagefor a reconsiderationof the socio- subsistenceof the group fora whole season. The Aborigines economicevolution of societies. rely above all on theirmobility and theirknowledge of the 1. Storageand economicstructure. First of all, I must stress environmentto securetheir daily food. the factthat I have not consideredstorage only as a technical All hunter-gatherersdo store or preserve food to some phenomenon.This is not to say that preservationtechniques extent.However, these practicesdo not play the same role are unimportant;on the contrary,anthropology has tradition- everywhere,and they are part and parcel of very different ally giventoo muchimportance to foodacquisition techniques economicstructures. On the one hand, hunter-gathererswho (hunting,gathering, and so on) and paid too littleattention to practiceintensive storage of abundantseasonal resourcesevery food preservationtechniques. This, however,is not the main year live offthese stores during an entireseason. On the other pointof my paper. Whateverthe importanceof storagewithin hand, the Plains Indians make pemmicanbecause its charac- theproductive forces, it should,in myopinion, be viewednot as teristicssuit the needs of a fundamentallynomadic society; a technicalphenomenon which in itselfhas explanatoryvalue, pemmicancan last foryears because storingin thiscase is not but ratheras a clue to theunderstanding of a specificeconomic aimed essentiallyat insuringsubsistence during the next structure.This is the economicstructure which I definein the season ofscarcity. Stores of pemmican can be used at any time. firstpart of my paper; its realisationpresupposes four condi- AfricanPygmies process meat in orderthat it maylast fora few tions,all equally necessary.I have stressedthe importanceof days (Bahuchet and Thomas n.d.); here preservationhas yet storage and referredto this type of economyas a "storing anotherfunction which is explainedby the importanceof the economy"because (1) the threeother conditions (i.e., abun- exchangeswith the neighboringagriculturalists. To sum up, I dance of resources,seasonality of resources,and efficientfood- wouldsay thatthe studyof foodpreservation and foodstorage gettingtechniques) are well knownand have been overempha- is crucialbecause it revealsthe mostsignificant characteristics

534 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Sat, 11 Jan 2014 17:10:33 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions of differenttypes of hunting-and-gatheringeconomy, whether Testart: FOOD STORAGE AMONG HUNTER-GATHERERS it is theirpatterns of exploitationof the naturalenvironment, theirexchanges with neighboringgroups, or even theirresi- gatherers.I also mentionthe fact that storageincreases the dencepatterns. yearly total amount of food available to the community. Perlman'scomments seem to be concernedonly with costs Neither Hayden nor Ingold takes this argumentinto con- and benefits,a questionwhich is onlyperipheral to the issue of sideration. my paper. I cannot see wherehe has found the groundsto Withregard to socialinequalities, the most frequent reproach maintainthat I focuson the disadvantagesof storage.In an (Hayden and Ingold) is that I make storagethe causal factor environmentcharacterized by strongseasonal variationsit is forthe developmentof inequalities.I have already said that obviouslybeneficial to store,if only because, as I mentionin storageshould be takenas the basis fora possibledevelopment my paper, intensivestorage transforms the season of scarcity of inequalities,and it does not seem necessaryto go over this into a long period of leisure and increasesthe yearly total again here.As forStuart's idea that the unsuccessfulhunters amountof foodavailable to the community. forman "underclass"among nomadic hunter-gatherers,this Rowley-Conwyinsists on the fact that food-storinghunter- is a verystrange idea indeed; the least we can say is that it is gatherersmust exploitseveral migratory species. I have never contraryto what has generallybeen observed (see, for in- supposedthe contrary,since all along I talk about resources. stance,Lee 1979:243-49), and thereforeI am curiousto know On the NorthwestCoast, fivespecies of Pacificsalmon can be what groupshe has in mind. distinguished;in California,nine speciesof oaks are economi- 3. The relevanceof storagefor a recontsiderationof the socio- cally important(Rostlund 1952; Baumboff1963:162). More- economicevolutiont ofsocieties. I am glad that Forbis has raised over, nobody is simplemindedenough to believe that the the questionof the differencebetween storing hunter-gatherers Indians could live onlyon salmonor acorns. and agriculturalists.This is obviously the main question 2. Sedentarism,population density, and social inequalities. emergingfrom my reconsiderationof currentanthropological Accordingto Ingold,storage is not incompatiblewith a nomad- views on hunter-gatherers.Of course there are evolutionary ism that recognizesfixed points in the landscape. From the differencesbetween hunter-gatherers and agricuilturalists.I do above discussion,it is clear that I agree with him insofaras not mean to say that agricultureis of no importance.I do limitedstorage is concerned.I disagreewith him,however, if believe,however, that the importanceof agriculturehas been he means to includeintensive storage, the onlytype of storage overemphasized.In my opinion,the Neolithicrevolution has with whichI am concernedin this paper. If hunter-gatherers to be reappraisedas follows: storeon a large scale, whv should theyhave to go on moving In my paper I have talked about threeaspects of society, about? Once theyhave accumulatedsufficient amounts of food namely,sedentarism, population densitv, and social inequality. to subsistfor a longperiod, why would they leave thesebehind Forbis wonderswhy I singleout these featuresas the "main to seek theirsubsistence elsewhere? I have insistedenough on aspects"of society. I do so becausethese features have generallv thispoint: large-scalestorage removes the needfor nomadism. been associated with the Neolithic,that is, the firstsocieties Ingold does not replyto this argument,however. Rather, he to have adopted an agriculturalway of life. Now, as I have accuses me of resortingto the notionof the incompatibility shownin this paper, we findthese threefeatures in nonagri- betweenstorage and nomadism,which he qualifiesas "well- culturalsocieties. We mustconclude, then, that they result not worn" even thoughI mentionit only to stressthat it "masks fromthe presenceof agriculture,but fromsomething else: I anotherimportant aspect" of the relationshipbetween storage have triedto showthat they result from an economicstructure and sedentarism.Stuart criticizesme for not providing"a in whichthe storageof resources,domesticated or not,is basic. plausible cause for sedentismin 'nonseasonal' environments Agriculture,however, acquires its fundamentalcharacter where it occurs" and mentionsthe "stratifiedhorticultural later in history.It is indeedwell-known, as Forbis notes,that societies" of tropical areas, but nowherehave I claimed to achievementssuch as writingor steel-makingoccur only providea generalexplanatory model of sedentarismvalid for amongagriculturalists. State societiesare agriculturalsocieties. all societiesin all environments.Sedentarism among cultivators Why do these developmentstake place only in agricultural has differentcauses, but this is totallyoutside the scope of contexts?I suggestthat the explanationruns as follows:Once my topic. hunter-gatherersare practicingintensive storage and livinga Hayden and Ingold reject the idea that sedentarismresults sedentarylife, they can, withoutany immediatemajor changes in populationincrease. Hayden claimshe has refutedthis idea in their way of life, adopt agriculture.Perhaps they do so in his 1981 article.Although I do not findhis argumentsalto- because population increase induces them to intensifythe getherconvincing, it would take too much space to discuss exploitationof their environment(Binford 1968). Probably themin detail here.Whatever the case may be, he shouldnot theydo so because it is in theinterest of theincipient dominant considerthe question settled,since he deals solely with the class to intensifyproduction so as to be able to divertan in- linkbetween sedentarism and populationdensity and not with creasingshare to its own advantage (Bender 1978). Thus, it the relationbetween storage and populationdensity, which is seems that many of the prehistorichunter-gatherers with a ofcourse decisive for my argument. Ingold wonders why women storingeconomy (such as, probably,the Natufians of Palestine, shouldhave less distanceto travelwhere the group is sedentary. the Jomonpeople of Japan, and perhaps some groupsof the Thereare at least tworeasons. The first,which Ingold acknowl- Woodlands of eastern North America) have come to adopt edges,is that duringthe season of scarcitythere is littleneed agriculture.I do not, then,see agricultureas the sole initial forthe womento move about to gatherfood because thegroup factorof evolution, as Childethought when he talkedabout the lives offstored supplies. The second,which he ignores,is that Neolithicrevolution; rather, I conceive of agricultureas an during the season of plenty the pattern of exploitationof intensificationfactor in a processwhich can ariseindependently. vegetable resourcesmay be differentin storingand in non- It is only owingto this intensificationthat the incipientclass storingeconomies: in the latter,gathering trips are almost stratificationlinked with storingeconomies can evolve into daily because the womengather each timeonly as muchas is full-fledgedclass societies,with all the achievementscurrently needed for the next few days; in the former,it is the whole associatedwith civilization. group (oftenincluding the men,as in California,for instance) I do not mean to replace the formerviews witha sequence thatmoves about to gatherthe food and transportit on a large which would postulate a uniformsuccession fromnomadic scale, and the women probably make many fewertrips. In hunter-gatherersto storing hunter-gatherersand finallyto any case, the reduced mobilityof women is not the only agriculturalists.In Californiaand on the NorthwestCoast, explanationfor high population density among storing hunter- Indians have remainedstoring hunter-gatherers to this day, Vol. 23 * No. 5 * October1982 535

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Sat, 11 Jan 2014 17:10:33 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions probably because the cultivationof maize was ill-suitedto Indians. Edited by F. W. Hodge. Bureau of AmericanEthnology these areas. In regionssuch as Mesoamerica or Southeast Bulletin30. Asia, the evolutionis yet different,since it GOLDSCHMIDT, W. 1959. Man's way. New York: Holt, Rinehartand seems that there Winston. were neverany storinghunter-gatherers. In theseregions the GOULD, R. A. 1975. Ecology and adaptative response among the firstsedentary storing economies come into existenceonce Tolowa Indians of northwesternCalifornia. Journal of California agricultureis well developed. I have already sufficiently Anthropology2:148-70. stressedthe importanceof GROSSE, E. 1896. Die Formen der Familie und die Formen der environmentalfactors in my paper Wirtschaft.Freiburg and Leipzig. to make it obviousthat I do not believeevolution could every- HARPENDING, H., and H. DAVIS. 1977. Some implicationsfor hunter- wherefollow the same path. gathererecology derived fromthe spatial structureof resources. WorldArchaeology 8:275-86. [SMP] HARRIS, D. R. 1977a. "Alternativepathways toward agriculture," in Originsof agriculture.Edited by C. A. Reed. Paris: Mouton. --. 1977b."Settling down: An evolutionarymodel forthe trans- formationof mobile bands into sedentarycommunities," in The ReferencesCited evolutionof social systems.Edited by J. Friedman and M. J. Rowlands. London: Duckworth. BAHUCHET, S., and J. THOMAS.n.d. "Conservation des ressources HARRIS, MARVIN. 1971. Culture, man, and nature. New York: alimentaires en foret tropicale humide: Chasseurs-cueilleurset Crowell. [BH] proto-agriculteursd'Afrique Centrale," in Les teclhniquesde con- HASSAN, F. A. 1975. "Determinationof the size, density,and growth servationdes grainsd longterme, vol. 3. In press. rate of hunting-gatheringpopulations," in Population,ecology, and BARTHOLOMEW, G. A., and J. B. BIRDSELL. 1953. Ecology and the social evolution.Edited by S. Polgar. Paris: Mouton. protohominids.American Anthropologist 55:481-98. 1977. "The dynamicsof agriculturalorigins in Palestine: A BAUMHOFF, M. A. 1963. Ecological determinantsof aboriginal theoretical model," in Origins of agriculture.Edited bv C. A. California populations. Universityof California Publications in Reed. Paris: Mouton. AmericanArchaeology and Ethlnology49:151-235. HAYDEN, BRIAN. 1981. Research and developmentin the Stone Age: BEAN, L. J., and H. LAWTON. 1973. "Some explanationsfor the rise Technological transitions among hunter-gatherers.CURRENT of cultural complexityin native California with comments on ANTIHROPOLOGY 22:519-48. [BH1 proto-agricultureand agriculture,"in Patternsof Indian butrning HIRTH, D. H. 1977. Social behaviorof wze,hite-taileddeer in relationtu in California:Ecology and etirnoiistory.Edited by H. T. Lewis. habitat.Wildlife Monographs 53. [SMP] Ramona: Ballena Press. JENNESS, D. 1932. The Indians of Canada. National Museum of BEAUCAGE, P. 1976. Enfer ou paradis perdu: Les societes de chas- Canada Bulletin 65. seurs-cueilleurs.Revue Canadiennede Sociologieet d'Anthropologie JOCHIM, M. A. 1976. Hunter-gatherersutbsistence and settlemnent:A 13:397-412. predictivemodel. New York: Academic Press. [DP] BENDER, B. 1978. Gatherer-hunterto farmer:A social perspective. JORDAN, A. T. 1974. Semi-sedentaryhunters and gatherersand the WorldArchlaeology 10:204-22. beginningsof agriculture.Papers in Anthropology(University of BERGER, T. R. 1977. Le nord,terre lointaine, terre ancestrale: Rapport Oklahoma)15(2):108-16. de l'enquetesur le pipelinede la valleedu Mackenzie.Vol. 1. Ottawa. KAJDAN, A. n.d. "La societe primitive,"in Ilistoire de l'antiqite. BINFORD, L. R. 1968. "Post-Pleistoceneadaptations," in New per- Edited by V. Diakov and S. Kovaev. Moscow: Editions du Progres. spectivesin archaeology.Edited by L. R. Binfordand S. R. Binford. KING, T. F. 1972. Nations of hunters?New views of California Chicago: Aldine. Indian societies.Indian Historian5(4):12-17. --. 1980. Willowsmoke and dogs' tails: Hunter-gatherersettle- . 1974. "The evolution of status ascription around San ment systemsand archaeologicalsite formation.American Antiq- FranciscoBay," in Antap: CaliforniaIndian politicaland economic uity45:4-20. organization.Edited by L. J. Bean and T. F. King. Ramona: BINFORD, L. H., and W. J. CHASKO. 1976. "Nunamiut demographic Ballena Press. history: A provocative case," in Demographic anthropology. KNIFFEN, F. B. 1939. Pomo geography.University of California Pub- Edited by E. B. W. Zubrow. Albuquerque: Universityof New licationsin AmericanArchaeology and Ethnology36:353-400. Mexico Press. KUNKEL, P. H. 1974. The Pomo kin group and the political unit in BIRDSELL, J. B. 1968. "Some predictionsfor the Pleistocene based aboriginal California.Journal of CaliforniaAnthropology 1:7-18. on equilibriumsystems among recenthunter-gatherers," in Man LEE, R. B. 1968. "What huntersdo fora living,or, How to make out thehunter. Edited by R. B. Lee and I. DeVore. Chicago: Aldine. on scarce resources,"in Man thehutnter. Edited by R. B. Lee and BLACK, L. 1973. The Nivkh (Gilyak) of Sakhalin and lower Amur. I. DeVore. Chicago: Aldine. ArcticAnthropology 10(1): 1-110. --. 1969. " !Kung Bushman subsistence: An input-output CARACO, THOMAS, and LARRY L. WOLF. 1975. Ecological determi- analysis," in Environmentand cultural behavior.Edited by A. nant of group sizes of foraginglions. AmericanNaturalist 109: Vayda. New York: Natural Historv Press. 343-52. 1972. "Population growthand the beginningsof sedentary CARNEIRO, ROBERT L. 1967. On the relationshipbetween size of life among the !Kung Bushmen," in Population growth:Anthro- population and complexityof social organization. Southwcestern pologicalimplications. Edited by B. Spooner,Cambridge: M.I.T. Journalof Anthropology 23:234-43. Press. CHILDE, V. G. 1954. "Early formsof society,"in A historyof tech- -. 1979. The !Kung San. Cambridge: Cambridge University nology,vol. 1. Edited by C. Singer et al. Oxford:Clarendon Press. Press. DRIVER, H. E., and W. C. MASSEY. 1957. Comparative studies of LEE, R. B., and I. DEVORE. 1968. "Problemsin the studyof hunters North AmericanIndians. Transactionsof theAmerican Philosoph- and gatherers,"in Man the hunter.Edited by R. B. Lee and I. ical Society47:163-465. DeVore. Chicago: Aldine. DUMOND, D. E. 1972a. "Population growthand political centraliza- --. Editors. 1968. Man thehunter. Chicago: Aldine. [SMP] tion," in Population growth:Anthropological implications. Edited Lips, E. 1951-52. Wanderung und Wirtschaftformender Ojibwa- by B. Spooner. Cambridge:M.I.T. Press. Indianer. WissenschaftlicheZeitschrift der UniversitMLeipzig 1(1). . 1972b. "Prehistoric population growth and subsistence --. 1956. Die Reisernteder Ojibwa-Indianer. Berlin: Aka- change in Eskimo Alaska," in Populationgrowth: Anthropological demische. implications.Edited by B. Spooner. Cambridge:M.I.T. Press. Lips, J. 1928. "Die Anfangedes Rechts an Grundund Boden bei den EMBER, C. R. 1978. Myths about hunter-gatherers.Ethnology Naturvblkernund der Begriffder Erntevolker,"in Festschriftfur 27:439-48. [DP] P. W. Schlmidt. EWERS, JOHN C. 1955. The lhorsein BlackfootIndian culture.Smith- LOWIE, R. H. 1963. Indians of the Plains. New York: Natural sonian Institution,Bureau of AmericanEthnology, Bulletin 159. HistoryPress. [RGF] MANDEL, E. 1962. Traited'economie marxiste. 2 vols. Paris: Julliard. FLANNERY, K. V. 1969. "Origins and ecological effectsof early MARTIN, M. K. 1974. Theforagingadaptation: Uniformity or diversity? domesticationin Iran and theNear East," in The domesticationand Addison-WesleyModule in Anthropology56. [DP] exploitationof plants and animals. Edited by P. J. Ucko and G. W. MURDOCK, G. P. 1967. Ethnographicatlas: A summary.Ethnology Dimbleby. Chicago: Aldine. 6:109-236. --. 1972. "The originsof the village as a settlementtype in MURDOCK, G. P., and D. 0. MORROW. 1970. Subsistence economy Mesoamerica and the Near East: A comparativestudy," in Man, and supportivepractices: Cross-cultural codes. Ethlnology9:302-30. settlement,and urbanism.Edited by P. J. Ucko, R. Tringham,and MURDOCK, G. P., and D. R. WHITE. 1969.Standard cross-cultural G. W. Dimbleby. London: Duckworth. sample. Ethnology8:329-69. --. 1973. The originsof agriculture.Annual Reviewof Antliro- MURDOCK, G. P., and S. F. WILSON. 1972. Settlementpatterns and pology2:271-310. communityorganization: Cross-culturalcodes 3. Ethnology11: GERARD, W. R. 1910. "Pemmican," in HIandbookof American 254-95.

536 CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Sat, 11 Jan 2014 17:10:33 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions O'SHEA, J. 1981. "Coping with scarcity: Exchange and social stor- Testart: FOOD STORAGE AMONG HUNTER-GATHIERERS age," in Economic archaeology.Edited by A. Sheridan and G. Bailey, pp. 167-83. British ArchaeologicalReports International Series 96. [PR] ---. 1955. Theory of cutltutrechlange. Urbana: University of PERLMAN, S. M. 1976. Optimumdiet models and prehistorichunter- Illinois Press. gatherers:A test on Martha's Vineyard.Unpublished Ph.D. dis- STUART, DAVID E. 1980. "Kinship and social organizationin Tierra sertation,Universitv of Massachusetts,Amherst, Mass. [SMP] del Fuego: Evolutionaryconsequences," in The versatilityof kin- 1980. "An optimum diet model, coastal variability,and ship. Edited by L. Cordell and S. Beckerman,pp. 269-84. New hunter-gathererbehavior," in Advancesin archeologicalmethod and York: Academic Press. [DES] theory,vol. 3. Edited by M. B. Schiffer,pp. 257-310. New York: STUART, DAVID E., and RORY P. GAUTHIER. 1981. PrehistoricNezw Academic Press. [SMPI Mexico. Santa Fe: Historic PreservationBureau of New Mexico. REDMAN, C. L. 1977. "Man, domestication,and culture in south- [DES] westernAsia," in Origins of agriculture.Edited by C. A. Reed. SURET-CANALE, J. 1969. "Les societes traditionnellesen Afrique Paris: Mouton. tropicaleet le concept de mode de productionasiatique," in Sur REED, C. A. 1969. "The patternof animal domesticationin the pre- le "modede productionasiatiqzue." Paris: Editions Sociales. historic Near East," in The domiiesticationand exploitationof SUTTLES, W. 1968. "Coping with abundance: Subsistence on the plants and animals. Edited by P. J. Ucko and G. W. Dimbleby. NorthwestCoast," in Man the huiinter.Edited by R. B. Lee and Chicago: Aldine. I. DeVore. Chicago: Aldine. 1977a. "A model for the originof agriculturein the Near TAYLOR, W. W. 1973. "Storage and the Neolithic Revolution," in East," in Origins of agricuiltutre.Edited by C. A. Reed. Paris: Estuidios dedicados al Professor Dr. Liuis Pericot. Barcelona: Mouton. Institutode Arqueologiay Prehistoria,Universidad de Barcelona. -. 1977b. "Origins of agriculture:Discussion and some con- TESTART, A. 1979. Pourquoi les societesde chasseurs-cueilleurssont- clusions," in Originsof agriculture.Edited by C. A. Reed. Paris: elles des societ6ssans classes? Anthiropologieet Societes 3:181-89. Mouton. 1981. "La conservationdes produitsveg6taux chez les chas- ROSTLUND, E. 1952. Freshuwaterfish and fishingin native North seurs-cueilleurs,"in Les techniquiesde conservationdes grainsd long America. University of California Publications in Geography termiie.Edited by M. Gast and F. Sigaut. Paris: CNRS. 9:1-314. --. n.d. Les chasseurs-cueilleurset la "r6volutionneolithique." ROWLEY-CONWY, P. n.d. "Sedentary hunters:The Erteb0lle exam- MS. ple," in Hunter-gatherereconomy in prehistory.Edited by G. Bailey. WATANABE, H. 1968. "Subsistence and ecology of northernfood Cambridge:Cambridge University Press. In press. [PR] gathererswith special referenceto the Ainu," in Man the huiinter. SAHLINS, M. D. 1972. StoneAge economizics.Chicago: Aldine. Edited by R. B. Lee and I. DeVore. Chicago: Aldine. SERVICE, E. R. 1962. Primitivesocial organization:An evoluttionary WILLIAMS, B. J. 1974. A miiodelof band society. Memoir of the Society perspective.New York: Random House. forAmerican Archaeology 29. [DP] --. 1966. The hutnters.Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. WISSLER, C. 1920. NorthAmi;erican Indians ofthe Plains. New York: SMITH, P. E. L. 1972.Changes in populationpressure in archaeological AmericanMuseum of Natural History. explanation.World Archaeology 4:5-18. WOODBURN, J. 1980. "Hunters and gathererstoday and reconstruc- --. 1976. Food productionand its consequtences.Menlo Park: tion of the past," in Sovietand Westernanthropology. Edited by Cummings. E. Gellner,pp. 95-117. London: Duckworth. [PR] STEWART, J. 1938. Basin-Plateautaboriginal sociopoliticalgroups. YESNER, D. R. 1977. Resource diversityand population stability SmithsonianInstitution, Bureau of AmericanEthnology Bulletin among hunter-gatherers.Western Canadian Journal of Anthiro- 120. [SMP] pology7: 18-59. [SMP]

Our commentsis very uneven.Quality is oftensacrificed, appar- ReadersWrite ently,in the interestof geographicdispersal. PAYSON D. SHEETS I shouldlike to warnagainst one possiblefurther step in econ- Departmentof Anthropology,University of Colorado,Boulder, omizingfor CA. You shouldnot seek to reducethe cost of the Colo. 80302, U.S.A. 13 I 81 systemof acceptingmanuscripts by simplyasking the corre- spondingeditors for theirevaluations. As one who has par- Some monthsago I happenedto read The Man-eatingMyth, ticipatedin the evaluationof CA manuscriptsat least a dozen by W. Arens,and I would be very muchinterested in the re- times (and the ultimatedecision was not always the same as actions of professionalanthropologists to the book, especially mine!), I appreciatevery much a systemin which 20 (or, to the possibleproofs of the existenceof cannibalism.I have more recently,15) refereesrather than one corresponding so farread onlyone reviewof it, whichappeared in Anthropos. editordecide upon publication.One personis biased; 15 per- My own opinionis that the belief in cannibalismin people sons are 15 timesmore biased, but theirviews correspondto verydifferent from us is firmlyentrenched in our civilization: differentbackgrounds and, since most do not knowthe writer we need to justifyour civilizationby contrastingit with"sav- personallv,are less likelyto be characterizedby sympathyor agery."A recurrenttheme in Europeanpopular literature and antipathy.However, you shouldfind someone to be correspond- philosophyis keepingthe distancebetween ourselves and an- ing editor from the U.S.S.R. Collectingand sendingmanu- imals and savages as great as possible.We must always have scriptsand criticalremarks from the Soviet Union is a task something(abstract thinking,arithmetic, monotheism, civil- in itself. ization . . .) that savages do not. And if Arenshas succeeded VILMOS VOIGT Csalogacny41, H-1027 Budapest, Hungary. 13 V 81 in showingsomething important, it is that anthropologyhas played a part in creatinga special kind of man totallydiffer- The so-calledCA* treatmentis not worththe cost involved. ent fromourselves-the savage (and cannibal).It seemsto me Evaluation of an articleis up to each reacher.A manuscript that therehas alwaysbeen a (sometimesvery clever and sub- may be distributedto several very competentscholars to de- tle) tendencyto representsavages in an alienatedway. Once cide on its eligibilityfor CA, but the commentsare in most it was the fashionto concentrateon the exotic,strange, and cases superficialeloquence or argumentfor argument'ssake. terrible.Now it is sometimesthe fashionto treat savages as Save the space for more articles,please. subjects of abstractscientific analysis, devoid of any human- WON-YONGKIM ity. Anthropologistswho have succeeded in couplingpoetic Department of Archaeology,Seoul National University,Seoul insightwith scientificcorrectness and abstractionare perhaps 151, Korea. 8 II 81 more the exceptionthan the rule. There have been several amongthe Russian and Finnishethnographers of the past. In I thinkmore selectivityin the acceptance of commentson America,I thinkPaul Radin is close to the ideal (of course, articleswould improvethe journal.Articles must pass through accordingto the standardsof the social sciencesof his day). a process of close scrutiny,which is generallysuccessful in JAAN KAPLINSKI weedingout the poorerarticles. However, the quality of the Arukula20-4, 202400 Tartu, Estonia, U.S.S.R. 13 iv 82

Vol. 23 * No. 5 * October1982 537

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Sat, 11 Jan 2014 17:10:33 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions