Globus: Globus, 72.1897

Anthropos, 80.1985,1/6

Bibliographische Daten

Zeitschrift

Strukturtyp:: Zeitschrift

Werks-URN (URL):: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-714784

URN:: urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-714784

Persistenter Identifier:: BV041217508

Titel:: Globus

Untertitel:: illustrierte Zeitschrift für Länder- und Völkerkunde

Weitere Titel:: Globus

Erscheinungsort:: Braunschweig

Verlag:: Vieweg

Erscheinungsjahr:: 1862

Sammlung:: Zeitschriften und Zeitungen > Zeitschriften zur Ethnologie

Wissensgebiet:: Sozial- und Kulturanthropologie > Allgemeines

Zeitschriftenband

Strukturtyp:: Zeitschriftenband

Werks-URN (URL):: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-709044

URN:: urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-709044

Persistenter Identifier:: DE-11-001785752

Titel:: Globus, 72.1897

Verlag:: Vieweg

Erscheinungsjahr:: 1897

Signatur:: LA 3252-72

Sammlung:: Zeitschriften und Zeitungen > Zeitschriften zur Ethnologie

Zeitschriftenheft

Strukturtyp:: Zeitschriftenheft

Titel:: Nr. 1. 3. Juli 1897

Sonstige Person:: Andree, Richard

Sammlung:: Zeitschriften und Zeitungen > Zeitschriften zur Ethnologie

644 Berichte und Kommentare Anthropos 80.1985 Nias; Schröder 1927: 12 - Batu Islands; Frik- kenschmidt 1929: 51 - Batu Islands). As a result of this literary inbreeding cer tain information became established as truth through repetition. One example concerns the transfer of the soul of a deceased person to an image using a spider. Here some highly specific information gathered by one writer in North Nias was used to explain the process for all of Nias. The soul transfer was first described by Thomas in the village of Sihareo, near the mission station in Ombalata, North Nias, in July 1877. A special four-legged spider was used to carry the spirit (Chatelin 1881: 146-156). Later, Kramer added that a six-legged spider was used (Kramer 1880: 474). Sundermann published a close paraphrase of Thomas (1905: 57-58), and Schröder (1917: 212) quoted Sun dermann directly. Kleiweg de Zwaan discussed the spider but did not claim to have seen the transfer (1927: 234). Wirz, likewise, did not see the act but added that another type of insect may have been involved (1930: 9). In secondary sources the description becomes even more distorted. Camerling called the spider mokomo- ko, a term which Thomas used to mean the spirit (Camerling 1928: 92). Suzuki called the use of the spider the “mokomoko ceremony” (1959: 125). Bodrogi claimed that the mokomo ko or nosododo takes the form of a spider (1972: 28). Thomas’ description of a peculiar act witnessed on a certain day in one village has been transformed in the literature to the prac tice for all times throughout Nias. It is this kind of regional confusion which confounds Suzuki’s dissertation. Virtually every section is an entangled web of material drawn from any region of Nias. A much longer treatise than the dissertation itself would be necessary to totally unravel the problems. A consideration of just one page will illustrate the problem (Suzuki 1959: 71). In the chiefs house in Bawömataluo there is a type of relief carving called Laso so hagu which Suzuki considers “phallic.” His structuralist ideology dictated that there should be only one on the left side of the communal room. 2 In fact there are two. A 2 Suzuki uses the term hagu laso based upon Schröder. laso so hagu represents a set of golden head ornaments which can be male or female. Suzuki claims that the right side of the house is male and the left female. Not only is this inaccurate, but at the village of Hilinawalo the distinctly female laso so hagu is on the right wall, and the male on the left (Fig.). Suzuki added that a row of dishes separates the communal room from Fig.: Female laso so hagu, right wall, omo sebua, Hilina walo village, South Nias (photo: Feldman 1974) the private quarters, whereas the row in ques tion is within the communal room and connects the symbols of the dead society (ancestral altar) with a carving on the left wall depicting the “living society” (the “Dutch cruiser”). On the same page even his use of published sources is inaccurate. Fischer never called a Bawomataluo carving “phallic” as described by Suzuki. In fact, Fischer was discussing a North Nias house model (1909: 24-26, 872/1 and ill. 5). If Suzuki’s dissertation is to be taken seriously, it will take months of scholarship to correct it. 3 For Suzuki to state that my work is neither different nor advanced over his is absurd (1984: 49, note 8). I am not, as Suzuki suggests, a “structural ist anthropologist.” I am an art historian. Con trary to Suzuki’s assertions, the structures recorded in my work were freely described to me by field informants. The oppositions were 3 I am not the only recent field researcher to find serious flaws in Suzuki’s work (see Marschall 1976: 204; Barbier 1978: 66; Viaro 1980: 89).

Zugriffsbeschränkung

Nutzungslizenz

Objekt: Anthropos, 80.1985,1/6

Zeitschrift

Zeitschriftenband

Zeitschriftenheft

Inhaltsverzeichnis

Downloads

Ganzer Datensatz

Diese Seite

Seitenauswahl

Bildfragment

Formate und Verlinkungen

Links

Zitieren

Ganzer Datensatz

Diese Seite

Zitierempfehlung