Incipit tractatus super Leviticum Origenis

Origenes

Jahrbuch für Volkskunde und Kulturgeschichte, 2=17.1974

Bibliographische Daten

Monographie

Strukturtyp:: Monographie

Werks-URN (URL):: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-707834

URN:: urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-707834

Persistenter Identifier:: BV041155062

Titel:: Incipit tractatus super Leviticum Origenis

Autor:: Origenes

Erscheinungsort:: [S.l.]

Erscheinungsjahr:: 1200

Beschreibung:: Allgemeines

Signatur:: 2008 B 112

Lizenz:: Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

Sammlung:: Handschriften > Mittelalterliche Handschriften

Wissensgebiet:: Allgemeines

Kapitel

Strukturtyp:: Kapitel

Titel:: Ex

Sammlung:: Handschriften > Mittelalterliche Handschriften

‘Jesus Is the Same Arutam” 495 Anthropos 106.2011 sent its features, I will explain the missionaries’ and indigenous’ intentions to create and accept this “de liberately researched syncretism” - a “syncretism” which has not caused an Amazon monoculture. The article is based on a twelve-months fieldwork (2005/06, 2008, 2009/10), which was conducted among Catholic Shuar and Achuar, including partic ipant observation, structured and unstructured inter views, visual mind maps, and an analysis of indig enous sources. My first contact with the indigenous religious identity took place in 2001, when I visited a Shuar family as a member of an ecological vol unteer project. In this family I got in touch with a wide religious pluralism, ranging from strongly con vinced evangelical missionaries and a former Cath olic seminarian to “traditional” believers, partici pating regularly in ayahuasca sessions and sharply criticizing the missionaries’ presence. For me, this differentiated handling of the Christian influence by the Shuar family was a first impetus to reconsider the concept of acculturation and monoculturation as a fundamental category of cultural contact and to re gard the indigenous not only as recipients but also as actors within these processes of globalization. Theoretical and Methodological Approach: Dissolving Dichotomies and Emphasizing the Local In my opinion, Lévi-Strauss was wrong in his fore cast and Descola in the analysis of the “Autochtho nous Church” because in the mentioned contexts both authors identified “culture” as a holistic, ho mogenous, bounded, and static entity, comparable to the Herderian “bowl model” (Herder 1827: 72) of culture. According to this model the encoun ter between the Old World and the New World can only lead to a clash, but not to an enduring inter penetrating relationship. 6 To sum up this perspective on colonialism in the words of the historian Ryan Dunch, “cultures are solid objects that collide like billiard balls, displacing one in favor of another; in other words, that colonialism leaves in its wake not a transformed or hybrid culture, but the absence of culture” (2002: 312). However, the contemporary world is extremely interconnected and characterized by flows and diffusions of objects, values, and ideas, which are permanently exchanged and integrat ed between human individuals and communities; 6 I am using the term “relationship” here in a neutral meaning. Nevertheless, it is clear that every kind of human interde pendency is not per se a symmetrical relationship but mostly situated in a context of power. for this reason, the German philosopher Wolfgang Welsch (1992) chooses the neologism of “transcul- turality” to define this interwoven condition of hu man relationships. For Welsch, culture has an open, dynamic, and negotiable structure, so that its ap parent territorial, national, or ethnical boundaries are constantly transgressed, as a result of which the “Other” is always becoming a part of one’s own. “What is called for today is ... to think of cultures beyond the contraposition of ownness and foreign ness,” Wolfgang Welsch writes (1999: 195 f.). Even if Welsch re-introduces the concept of “transcultur- ality” into the academic discourse, neither the term nor the theoretical discussions linked to it have been new to the professional circles of cultural and so cial anthropological studies. So, the Spanish term transculturación has been used in ethnolingustic and sociocultural studies describing the various as pects of Afro-Caribbean and mestizo cultures in Latin America since the second half of the past cen tury (Hildebrandt 2005: 347). 7 Moreover, other so cial anthropologists have already defined culture as a processual, contextual, and deterriorialized enti ty which is permanently transformed by continuous cultural interactions. 8 I am referring to this trans cultural model of culture, analyzing the Shuar cat echist’s statement as an example of transcending the cultural boundaries between two religious systems by transferring the foreign symbol into the local, in digenous environment. Following this paradigm of transculturality, I also allude to Karl-Heinz Kohl’s remarks on the flexibility of autochthonous religions (1988). Kohl is arguing that the openness of oral re ligious systems abets the integration of cultural for eign elements; in the situation of cultural contact, autochthonous religions have survived because they permit a religious tradition to change, states Kohl (1988: 258 if.). He exemplifies his argument by re porting on an Indonesian creation myth, which in corporates several biblical elements, adopting them according to the particular context on Flores Island. Hans Peter Hahn finally associates this kind of reac tion with new cultural phenomena within the theo retical framework of “cultural appropriation.” In his article “Diifusionism, Appropriation, and Globaliza- 7 In his publication “Contrapunteo cubano del tabaco y el azú car” (1940), the Cuban social anthropologist Femando Ortiz illustrates, how the production process of tobacco and sugar in which different cultural groups participated has changed the Cuban society. This mutual interrelation of diverse cul tures, by which these cultures as well as Cuba itself were transformed, Ortiz calls “transculturation” (transcultura- ción). See furthermore the ethnolinguistic contributions and literary study of Jiménez Moreno (1965), Romero Pintado (1987), and Rama (1982). 8 E.g., Garcia Canclini (1990); Hannerz (1987); Wolf (1982).

Zugriffsbeschränkung

Nutzungslizenz

fullscreen: Anthropos, 106.2011,2

Monographie

Kapitel

Inhaltsverzeichnis

Downloads

Ganzer Datensatz

Diese Seite

Bildfragment

Formate und Verlinkungen

Links

Zitieren

Ganzer Datensatz

Diese Seite

Zitierempfehlung