Page Banner

Full Text: Tribus, 23.1974

Buchbesprechungen 
225 
15 
disappointing in the whole book, since the 
author was admirably qualified to have writ 
ten a thorough discussion of the complicated 
relationships involved in the problem. The 
well-informed reader cannot fail to gain the 
impression that here the author was hedging 
again, waiting for the last link in the chain, 
the one final piece of evidence which would 
end the controversy once and for all. This 
hesitation is nearly fatal to the book, since 
here after all is the magnum opus by the 
scholar who could have written with author 
ity on the Hsiung-Nu, winnowing out the 
dross and showing what the Huns and the 
Hsiung-Nu did have in common. Maenchen- 
Helfen never returns to the Hsiung-Nu with 
any certain thoroughness in subsequent chap 
ters, and a disconcerting feeling of incom 
pleteness lingers on in the air. While the 
chapters on the European Huns are written 
with his usual brilliance and even some good 
humour, he fails to make the points one an 
xiously awaits when opening the book to the 
first page. It is also disappointing that, after 
having made the point that this work is to 
differ from all others on the Huns, parti 
cularly in its use of archaelogical material, he 
fails to use every device available to a scholar 
presenting such material. There is not a single 
map of the entire text, and while there are 
excellent illustrations, there are none in which 
the illustrated material is arranged in a chart 
according to location, type or chronological 
sequence. This is especially inconvenient when 
the reader attempts to compare cauldrons 
found in different locations, and most especi 
ally with the Hunnic bow, since “the history 
of Eurasia septentrionalis antiqua runs paral 
lel to the history of the Hunnic bow“ (p.222). 
Nor did the author care to venture into the 
thorny problem of the possible relationships 
of the Hsiung-Nu and the Huns to the Iranian 
Huns. He alludes to Gobel’s excellent book 
on the subject, but says little more, other than 
to speculate that future research results would 
probably be meagre. This, too, is probably 
being a bit too cautious; moreover, it would 
seem that Maenchen-Hclfen’s earlier habit of 
reaching negative conclusions before all the 
results are in had not left him. He closes this 
section on the Iranian Huns with the hope 
that future archaeological endeavours by the 
Chinese and Soviet scholars will shed further 
light on the nature of the problem. 
This truly Is the final message of the book. 
Further archaeological treatment of all the data 
considered in the World of the Huns, plus all 
that was omitted, is sorely needed. Since the 
author’s death there has not been a similar 
attempt to compile all the relevant informa 
tion and to give a meaningful answer to the 
many questions in these complex studies. 
Needed as well is an end to the meaningless 
speculation concerning side issues which lead 
nowhere. There is much work to be done by 
those who want to carry on Maenchen-Hel- 
fen’s task, by those who want to know “how 
it was.“ 
Jerome Sigler 
SYLVIA VATUK: 
Kinship and Urbanization: white-collar 
migrants in North India, Berkeley, Los 
Angeles, London: University of California 
Press. 1972: XV, 219 S. ISBN 0 520 02064 2. 
Die vorliegende Studie basiert auf einjäh 
riger Feldforschung 1966—67 in zwei Mo- 
hallas (Quartieren) der Stadt Meerut, U.P. 
Durch Verwandtschaftsbeziehungen, die hier 
üblicherweise diejenigen Voraussetzungen bil 
den, unter denen Fremden in den Quartie 
ren Möglichkeiten des Zuzugs und der so 
zialen Eingliederung geboten werden, ver 
fügte die Verfasserin über eine für die teil 
nehmende Beobachtung günstige Ausgangs 
position, obschon die damit zugleich verbun 
dene Zuweisung der Rolle einer „Eingehei 
rateten“ dem traditionellen System nach den 
informativen Kontakt zu den Männern der 
Quartiere versperrt hätte, wenn sich nicht 
bereits alternative Verhaltensweise herausge 
bildet hätte. Damit sind wir bereits mitten in 
der von Vatuk behandelten Thematik, deren 
Formulierung somit von der eigenen Lage 
der Verfasserin wesentlich mitbestimmt wor 
den zu sein scheint. 
Eine über die Möglichkeiten der teilneh 
menden Beobachtung hinausgehende Erfas 
sung sozialstatistischer Daten wurde zum Teil 
mit fremder Hilfe (möglicherweise etwas zu 
frühzeitig) unternommen. Werthaltungen 
(Attitüden) wurden nicht aufgenommen, son 
dern nur zensusartig Daten zur Person (inkl. 
Schulbildung und Heiratsalter), zu Wohnung 
(Zuzugsjahr, Raumzahl, Mieterzahl usw.), zu 
Besitz (Häuser, Land, Gebrauchs- und Pre- 
stigegütcr) und finanziellen Verhältnissen so 
wie den jeweiligen wirtschaftlichen Bezichun-
	        
Waiting...

Note to user

Dear user,

In response to current developments in the web technology used by the Goobi viewer, the software no longer supports your browser.

Please use one of the following browsers to display this page correctly.

Thank you.