4 Ho accounts of social cohesion in history, myth, and the present

Eva Reichel

Chapter

Requires Authentication

4 Ho accounts of social cohesion in history, myth, and the present

Eva Reichel
Eva Reichel

Search for this author in:

De Gruyter De Gruyter Brill | Google Scholar

or

Purchase Chapter PDF

$42.00

Published by

Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Explore this Subject How to publish with us

This chapter is in the book The Ho: Living in a World of Plenty

4Hoaccountsofsocialcohesion in history,myth, andthe presentHierarchy,history, and mythThe data discussed in the previous chapter have shown that the diversityofsub-clan namescontributesto expressing status distinctionsand hierarchical rela-tions between the subclans withinaclan and that clans as such are importantstatus providers in arrangingmarriages. The present chapter will illustrate inseveral fieldwork-based ethnographic accounts aspects of status and hierarchyembedded in Ho constructions of history andmyth.GivenamultitudeofHoclans and subclans, hierarchyinits etymologicalsense provides and accounts foraranking and orderingofHosocial categoriesin relation to the Ho’ssociocosmic whole, independent of and separate from po-litical and economic power inequalities and social stratification (Dumont 1970:66). Hierarchical relations are givensubstance inmyths about the first settlers(munu hoko), in various subclans’myths of origin, and in their’histories’of mi-gration and settlement (disum amin–disum nam), which are kept alive by beingtransmitted orallyand which impact people’sinterrelations and interaction inthe present.Myths conveyaperfected, abstracted, or meta model, an orderthat Lévi-Strauss contrasted as a“thought-of”order (Lévi-Strauss 1953: 548) to“lived-in”social orders,ofwhich kinship is one, and human statistical or empir-ical praxis. Of course, these tworealms are linked, as Leach points out,since allmyths constitute“acharter foracommunity’sbeliefs or actions in the present”(Leach 1990:229).AccordingtoLeach,amyth is timeless and constantlyre-enacted in ritual performance⁸³–as opposed to (written) history that is time-bound,that cannot berepeated, thatisoriented towards and anchored in thepast,and thatremains there.Amyth, however,isastory about the past“peggedto an identifiable relic andaplace on the map [...]its chronologyatbest ambig-uous”(ibid.) and its orientation directed towards the present.Iarguethat Hosubclanmyths of origin are about hierarchicalrelations choreographed by to-temic and other designations as‘identifiablerelics’,while in this respect local-ities as discrete‘places on the map’do not matter.⁸⁴On the otherhand, in HoAssmann (2007: 57) similarlystresses thatmyths (orally) stored in human memory and con-stitutive of apeople’scultural memory construct‘reality’and keep the worldgoing.1. Seeabovethe subchapteron(sub)clan namesthat areidentical with village names into-day’sJharkhand.2. In the originmyth of (the Santal) clanMurmuan allusionto Champa is madehttps://doi.org/10.1515/9783110666199-008

You are currently not able to access this content.

Not sure if you should have access? Please log in using an institutional account to see if you have access to view or download this content.

Purchase Chapter PDF

$42.00

4Hoaccountsofsocialcohesion in history,myth, andthe presentHierarchy,history, and mythThe data discussed in the previous chapter have shown that the diversityofsub-clan namescontributesto expressing status distinctionsand hierarchical rela-tions between the subclans withinaclan and that clans as such are importantstatus providers in arrangingmarriages. The present chapter will illustrate inseveral fieldwork-based ethnographic accounts aspects of status and hierarchyembedded in Ho constructions of history andmyth.GivenamultitudeofHoclans and subclans, hierarchyinits etymologicalsense provides and accounts foraranking and orderingofHosocial categoriesin relation to the Ho’ssociocosmic whole, independent of and separate from po-litical and economic power inequalities and social stratification (Dumont 1970:66). Hierarchical relations are givensubstance inmyths about the first settlers(munu hoko), in various subclans’myths of origin, and in their’histories’of mi-gration and settlement (disum amin–disum nam), which are kept alive by beingtransmitted orallyand which impact people’sinterrelations and interaction inthe present.Myths conveyaperfected, abstracted, or meta model, an orderthat Lévi-Strauss contrasted as a“thought-of”order (Lévi-Strauss 1953: 548) to“lived-in”social orders,ofwhich kinship is one, and human statistical or empir-ical praxis. Of course, these tworealms are linked, as Leach points out,since allmyths constitute“acharter foracommunity’sbeliefs or actions in the present”(Leach 1990:229).AccordingtoLeach,amyth is timeless and constantlyre-enacted in ritual performance⁸³–as opposed to (written) history that is time-bound,that cannot berepeated, thatisoriented towards and anchored in thepast,and thatremains there.Amyth, however,isastory about the past“peggedto an identifiable relic andaplace on the map [...]its chronologyatbest ambig-uous”(ibid.) and its orientation directed towards the present.Iarguethat Hosubclanmyths of origin are about hierarchicalrelations choreographed by to-temic and other designations as‘identifiablerelics’,while in this respect local-ities as discrete‘places on the map’do not matter.⁸⁴On the otherhand, in HoAssmann (2007: 57) similarlystresses thatmyths (orally) stored in human memory and con-stitutive of apeople’scultural memory construct‘reality’and keep the worldgoing.1. Seeabovethe subchapteron(sub)clan namesthat areidentical with village names into-day’sJharkhand.2. In the originmyth of (the Santal) clanMurmuan allusionto Champa is madehttps://doi.org/10.1515/9783110666199-008

You are currently not able to access this content.

Not sure if you should have access? Please log in using an institutional account to see if you have access to view or download this content.

Purchase Chapter PDF

$42.00