|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17). Nevertheless, at the end of Theories of Primitive Religion he quotes Bergson extensively on the instinctual nature of religious behavior and, although he is critical, the prominence of place suggests agreement and continues an argument he presented earlier.
15 This stance is consistent with his understanding of societies as moral systems. Perhaps finally Evans-Pritchard's colleagues and students only heard his questioning of the poison oracle's logic. They certainly did not join in his agonizing introspection and in the end Evans-Pritchard considered himself alone in perceiving these dilemmas in the study of religion (1966:170). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
British anthropologists continued to study African religions despite Evans-Pritchard's warnings, but it was always clear how religion was being approached, as Middleton's first line in his preface to Lugbara Religion indicates: "This book does not seek to present Lugbara religion as a system of theology, but to make a sociological analysis of the place of ritual and belief in Lugbara social life" (1964:v).16 British anthropologists were primarily concerned with the relationship of witchcraft to social systems, following as they did Evans-Pritchard's conclusion that witchcraft accusations were means of adjusting social relationships and allocating responsibility.17 Their publications constitute a formidable body of scholarship on witchcraft, but it developed at the expense of research on other aspects of religion (divination is only marginally treated18) and the consideration of religions as systems (see Kuper 1985:13839). It is extraordinary that so much attention could be devoted to witchcraft and so little to divination, especially when it is still the only means of detecting witchcraft for many African peoples. Ironically, British (and other) anthropologists have produced study after study which simply offer "then the matter was decided by a diviner" and nothing more. In fact, the basic research guide Notes and Queries on Anthropology makes only two brief references to divination in nearly four hundred pages of advice to fieldworkers. Studies of divination appeared occasionally, of course; but even Turner, whom we can praise for his insights into Ndembu basket divination, never attended a divination session (Werbner 1972:231). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Although British social anthropologists working in Africa produced significant studies of religion, religion (and thereby divination because it was considered only in its spiritual dimensions)was portrayed as derivative of the social system, primarily understood through kinship and government. And if religious belief and practice "worked" (by supporting kinship structure, allowing emotional release, and so on), then it did not matter whether religion was "logical." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But even more striking is the number of British anthropologists who treated divination with great derision. "When he divined for me, I deliberately misled him," Lienhardt writes (1970:69). Beattie informs us that the diviner was well aware that "he was simply putting on an act" (1967a:64). Fortes characterizes divination as "the game'' (1966:421), while Middleton refers to a spirit-possessed diviner's speech as "gibberish" (1971:271). And Parrinder cannot-believe that anything is revealed by divination's "haphazard methods" (1976:122). Unless we also accept similarly contentious characterizations of polygynous marriages or initiation ceremonies as a legitimate part of the ethnographic literature on African |
|
|
|
|
|