Trobriand Chiefs and Fathers

Author(s): H. A. Powell and Mark S. Mosko

Source: The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, Vol. 3, No. 1 (Mar., 1997), pp.
154-159
Published by: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3034370
Accessed: 31-05-2018 00:29 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland is collaborating with JSTOR
to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of the Royal Anthropological
Institute

This content downloaded from 104.244.125.2 on Thu, 31 May 2018 00:29:33 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 COMMENT

Trobriand chiefs and fathers 1995: 79. 82). Not once was he or his status as
guyau likened to that of a 'father'.
This is not to imply that fathers were not ex-
Ingenious and well-argued though it is, pected to be benevolent to their sons. Indeed, it
Mosko's (1995) interpretation of Trobriand was in their interests to be so. As Mosko is
chieftaincy seems to me erroneous. The reason aware, it was politically necessary for the Tabalu
is implicit in his reference to 'the considerablechiefs to gain the personal support of their
evidence for rapid change' (1995: 764), which sons, who were usually the likely leaders of
neither he nor other modern writers on the their own local and descent groups, partly be-
Trobriands take sufficiently into account. No cause their fathers were Tabalu. This is exem-
doubt the equation of Trobriand 'chiefs' (guyau) plified in Malinowski's (1932: 10-13, 113-14)
with 'fathers' (tama) was made by the inform- and my (1960: 130) discussions of the feud be-
ants of the researchers on whose reports he re- tween To'uluwa's heir Mitakata and his son
lies; but I am aware of no clear evidence of Namwana Guyau. The latter was dead by 1950,
such identification reported by anthropologists but his younger brothers Yobukwau and
(e.g. Seligman, Malinowski, Hogbin, Jerry Kalogusa tried in the 1930s to claim Tabalu
Leach and myself) or administrators (e.g. R.L. rights and privileges by virtue of patrilineal in-
Bellamy, Leo Austen or the ANGAU Sergeant heritance - for the Tabalu chiefs' sons, but not
Gordon Saville) or missionaries (notably Fathernecessarily for their own. While 'good' leaders
B. Baldwin) who reported on pre-1970s Trobri-or chiefs might have been likened individually
and culture. Had such an identification been to good fathers, no such equation was made by
significant to the Islanders of their times, it my informants of the behaviour of chiefs in
would surely have been reported by at least general, least of all that of the Tabalu guyau
those observers who could have exploited it to(Powell 1960; 1995).
manipulate the Trobriand chieftaincy for their I translated the term urigubu, pace Weiner
political and other ends, not least for the dis-(1976) et al. as 'marriage tribute', and called the
semination of Christian concepts of God and polygamous chief's affines 'tributary' (Powell
paternity. 1960), because the term urigubu was used by my
That alien influences were taking effect was informants much as Malinowski reported it, as
apparent in 1950-1, when my discussions of a general term for ceremonial harvest gifts to
kinship and marriage elicited an account of women and/or their husbands from various
physical paternity which could have been in- categories of kin and local group members. For
digenous or a reflection of European teaching marriages in general, part of its significance was
(Powell 1968: 651-3; 1969a: 184-5); but I re- as the return (mapula) for the care bestowed by
corded no hint of any identification of chiefshusbands on their wives and their offspring on
with fathers. Possible alien cultural influencesbehalf of the wives' 'brothers', the men of their
were acknowledged by Spiro in his reappraisal matrilineal subclans, who included the hus-
of the Oedipus complex in the Trobriands, to bands' sons. These men could not care directly
which Mosko does not refer (Spiro 1984; cf for their subclans' womenfolk and children
Powell 1986). By the 1950s the Christian no- themselves because of the incest taboos and
tion of God the loving Father could have beenrules of exogamy (Powell 1969a; 1969b). Young
adapted to sustain the pre-eminence of chiefs as men in particular could not appear to play any
benevolent father figures rather than malevo-part in their sisters' sexual or reproductive ac-
lent autocrats; but my informants equated thetivities, and their fathers might make gardens
Omarakana Tabalu chiefs in particular with un-for them until they were old enough and had
scrupulous autocrats and sorcerers, rather as become socially, if not physically, 'distant'
Saville (1974) recalled Mitakata. My informantsenough from the girls they grew up with to
discussed Mitakata's rights and responsibilitiesgarden for them without risk to their respect
as Tabalu guyau of Omarakana in many con- relationship. But where there was a power dif-
texts, notably during the frustrating delays be- ferential between wife-givers and important
fore the kula fleet sailed to Kitava in 1951, husbands, the giving of a wife was explicitly an
which were caused partly by Mitakata's reluc- act of appeasement and alliance. I arrived in
tance to sail there in his own canoe (Powell Kiriwina too soon after the 1950 main harvest,

This content downloaded from 104.244.125.2 on Thu, 31 May 2018 00:29:33 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 COMMENT 155

and without the linguistic competence, to at-
tempt an analysis of the harvest prestations of
the depth and scope of those of Weiner and
Montague. Even so, despite a generation sepa-
rating our researches, my tables of harvest
prestations (1969b) are, as far as they go, conso- by a father would be living in a village other
nant with the transaction categories cited by
Mosko (1995: 770).
That Mosko does not discuss my account
does not in itself invalidate his argument from
these gift classifications: but inasmuch as his
interpretation may rest upon European-influ-
enced concepts of Trobriand fatherhood, it can
hardly represent the local or regional indige-
nous culture. The 'Virgin Birth' arguments of
the late 1960s made it clear that it is not possi- that in the indigenous culture 'chiefs' were
ble to establish definitively the indigenous Tro- identified with 'fathers', except perhaps in the
briand beliefs about procreation. I have argued
further (Powell 1986) that as soon as European
or other alien elements impinge upon the Kiri-
winan or any other native language it becomes
impossible to establish definitively the pre-
European 'meaning' of any concepts it desig-
nated. My account of the Trobriand elementary
family (Powell 1969a: 184 sqq.) showed that, in
the ontogenesis of the individual Trobriand
child, the traditional patterns of residence and
family behaviour are essentially the same as in
the Austrian families from which Freud derived
the Oedipus complex (Powell 1986). The Tro-
briand son traditionally grew up in a household
headed by a father who tried to exercise per-
sonal control over him as in any other co-
domiciled elementary family (Powell 1969a:
184-6). There are factors which may weaken
the intensity of the emotional ties within the
Trobriand family, but if the Oedipus complex Stocksfleld, Northumberland
exists at all, it should take the same form in the
Trobriands as in Freud's account.
It should be remembered that I worked in
the same group of villages as did Malinowski,
among the traditional associates of the Tabalu
of Omarakana, who were themselves the focus
of tradition and, as I have observed elsewhere, I
was there in the aftermath of the military occu- Feinberg, R. (ed.) 1995. Seafaring in the
pation by American forces, on whose departure
there was a swing back to tradition in the ab-
sence of the means of maintaining new ways.
What I observed was thus probably nearer pre-
European conditions, when intergroup hostili-
ties made men's residence in other villages than
their own insecure, so that most children grew
up in villages in which most of the male house- Powell, HA. 1960. Competitive leadership in
hold heads, certainly all the men of the owning
subclan(s), counted as their fathers (tama) in
formal kinship terms (Powell 1969b: 597-600),
while the head of the village might well be a
senior father's father. There might be some
equation of individual leaders with fathers: but
not all Trobriand fathers are always benevolent.
To each other, the men of the matrilineal own-
ing subclans are EB or YB (tuwa or bwada),
MB-ZS (kada) or MMF-ZDS (tabu) - potential
rivals for the leadership of the community,
whose head is variously their tabu (MMB) or
tuwa (EB). Thus, in my time and before, it was
likely that land for gardens was allocated to
men resident in their subclan's village by their
matrilineal kinsmen, while a man allocated land
than his own (cf Mosko 1995: 774 sqq). Under
the European-imposed regime of the inter- and
immediately post-war periods, the pressures on
men to reside in their own subclan villages had
been reducing, and their further weakening
may account for some of the differences be-
tween Weiner's and Montague's findings and
mine.
Thus, in my view, there is no real evidence
context of idiosyncratic personal relationships. I
have no major quarrel with the general conclu-
sions to Mosko's otherwise very creditable
attempt to formulate a unifying theory of
Melanesian leadership. But Jerry Leach's,
Montague's and Weiner's accounts describe
phases of Kiriwinan culture which are signifi-
cantly more 'modern' in political, economic
and religious terms than those I and my prede-
cessors observed. It seems to me that in as
much as Mosko relies on a modern identifica-
tion of Trobriand chiefs with fathers, he weak-
ens his own broader case, since whatever the
'quite distinctive practice ... locally projected'
(Mosko 1995: 780) in the Trobriands, the iden-
tification ofguyau chiefs with tama fathers was
not reported by the earlier recorders of the in-
digenous culture.
H.A. POWELL
Austen, L. 1945. Cultural changes in Kiriwina.
Oceania 16, 16-60.
Bellamy, R.L. 1908. Notes on the customs ofthe
Trobriand Islander. Papua Annual Report for
1907.
contemporary PacftcIslands. DeKalb: Northern
Illinois Univ. Press.
Malinowski, B. 1932. 7he sexual life ofsavages (3rd
edn). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Mosko, M.S. 1995. Rethinking Trobriand
chieftainship. J. R anthrop. Inst. (N.S.) 1,
763-85.
liobriand political organisation.J. R. anthrop.
Inst. 90, 118-45.
1968. Virgin birth Man (N.S.) 4, 651-2.
1969a. Genealogy, residence and
kinship in Kiriwina. Man (N.S.) 3, 178-202.
1969b. Territory, hierarchy and kinship
in Kiriwina. Man (N.S.) 4, 580-604.
1980. Review of Weiner (1976). Am.
Anthrop. 82, 700-2.
1986. ReviewofSpiro 1984. Man (N.S.)
21, 380-1.

This content downloaded from 104.244.125.2 on Thu, 31 May 2018 00:29:33 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 156 COMMENT

1995. Seamanship and politics in (1961), based entirely on the pre-1960 data in-
northern Kiriwina. In Seafaring in the cluding Powell (1956). This was prior to the
contemporary Paciftc islands (ed.) R. Feinberg.time when Powell maintains 'the Christian no-
DeKalb: Northern Illinois Univ. Press. tion of God the loving Father' had been intro-
Saville, G. withJ. Austin 1974. King of Kiriwina. duced through European teachings and applied
London: Leo Cooper. to guyau as 'benevolent father figures'. It must
Spiro, M.E. 1984. Oedipus in the Trobriands. be reiterated, my model of Trobriand
Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press. 'chieftainship' relies as much on pre-1970
Weiner, A.B. 1976. Women of value, men of renown.sources (Malinowski, Seligman, Austen, Bald-
Austin: Univ. of Texas Press. win, Powell) as post-1970 ones (Weiner, Mon-
tague, Hutchins, Campbell, Digim'Rina).
Powell's views on my re-analysis of Trobriand Indeed, Powell's current references to his
'chieftainship' merit serious consideration. He own early reports strongly reinforce the pre-
has studied the society in the field while I have 1970 relevance of my analysis. For example,
not. The most I can lay claim to is rearranging '[Tabalu 'chiefs"] sons, who were usually the
the ethnographic fragments provided by him likely leaders of their own local and descent
and others into an understandable pattern. But groups, partly because their fathers were
as Powell cautions, this pattern was not de- Tabalu' and 'even so, despite a generation sepa-
tected by him or other investigators. For a caserating our [i.e. Weiner's and Montague's from
as well-documented and famous as the Trobri- Powell's] researches, my tables of harvest
ands, is this plausible? Powell also raises some prestations are as far as they go consonant with
of the doubts currently burdening social
the transaction categories cited by Mosko' (ref-
anthropology as regards the extent to which
erences deleted). If on the basis of the evidence
ethnographic writing and description have been
I cite, Powell accepts the 'father-leader-chief'
distorted by alien cultural influences, especially
analogies which were overlooked by post-1970
those of the colonizing West.
ethnographers, he must concede the possibility
Powell's scepticism arises mainly from the
that those analogies might apply to previous pe-
fact that neither he nor other pre-1970s ob-
riods even though the earlier ethnographers
servers reported an 'identification' or 'equation'
also failed to identify and report them.
of Trobriand 'fathers' (tama), 'leaders' (toliwaga)
It is nonetheless worth pondering the kinds
and 'chiefs' (guyau). My analysis, he argues,
of evidence Powell would require in order to
could only pertain to the post-1970 era after
establish an 'identification' of Trobriand 'fa-
alien Christian notions of benevolent paternity
thers', 'leaders' and 'chiefs'. He argues with re-
and deity had been introduced. Here Powell
spect to his own early data, for example, that
misconstrues my argument on several counts.
'there might be some equation of individual
First, I nowhere proclaim an 'equation' or
'identification' of any simple kind. What I pro- leaders with fathers, but not all Trobriand fa-
pose are metaphorical relation-s between 'fathers', thers are always benevolent'. Note here that it
'leaders' and 'chiefs' on the basis of analogous is Powell who introduces the 'benevolence' no-
categorizations, analogous types of agency, and tion - an important point to which I shall re-
analogous processes of sociality. I can agree with turn. But assuming for now that 'benevolence'
Powell that mere denotative identifications and did have meaning to Trobrianders in the past, it
equations of the type he has in mind could not should occasion no surprise to learn that most,
easily have passed unnoticed in the early ethno- even all, liobriand 'fathers' (or 'leaders' or
graphy. I also think without contradiction (and 'chiefs') have not always been 'benevolent', or
anthropology's entire ethnographic record at- viewed as such, in every one of their actions.
tests to it) that connotative metaphors and Yet that fact is quite irrelevant to whether or
analogies of the sort I have in mind can often how the categories 'father', 'leader' and 'chief'
escape conscious recognition by ethnographers are linked metaphorically in the indigenous
and sometimes by their subjects. But in the sphere of public meaning. What can Powell
case at hand, that is not exactly what I have ar- possibly mean by 'some equation' that does not
gued either. presume cultural associations of the order I
Before I pursue that point, it should be noted have identified? Does he mean to say that a 100
that Powell's objection actually confirms the per cent. statistical conformity of actual behav-
position he criticizes. While rejecting the iours to expressed expectations is necessary to
'father-leader-chief' metaphor for the pre- establish the presence of a culturally significant
1970s era, he accepts it as pertinent for 1970 relationship?
onwards on the basis of the recently-gathered Apparently so, for elsewhere he reasons,
information I examine. But in all of that pub- 'While "good" leaders or chiefs might have
lished material there is not actually a single ex- been likened individually to "good" fathers, no
plicit identification or equation of the kind such equation was made by my informants of
Powell seeks either. Aside from an earlier for- the behavior of chiefs in general' (emphasis added).
mulation of my own (Mosko 1985), the only Again, informants' perceptions, and for that
published assertion of a symbolic link between matter their moral evaluations, of the actual be-
'fathers' and 'chiefs' (but not 'leaders') is Leach haviour of guyau are of an entirely different

This content downloaded from 104.244.125.2 on Thu, 31 May 2018 00:29:33 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 COMMENT 157

epistemological order from idealized or con- this rather than her 'father'? Powell provides no
ventionalized statements of how 'chiefs' (or 'fa- answer. In my account, however, there is no
thers' or 'leaders') are understood to share cer- anomaly when either 'fathers' or brothers give
tain features in contradistinction to other kaymwila. And thanks to Powell's query, I can
recognized types (e.g. 'mothers', 'sisters', 'mis- now venture that it is through the 'father's' dis-
sionaries', 'anthropologists'). tinctive contributions of 'feeding' and 'forming'
Powell's other major claim - that the post- his son's and daughter's persons that the adult
1970s 'equation' of 'fathers', 'leaders' and transformation of their respect relationship is
'chiefs' is a result of recent European -influence understood to be affected.
- involves the much more difficult question of Regarding the other category of yam ex-
the authenticity of ethnographic description, change (kaymata) tied closely to adult men's
interpretation and analysis. I take this to be the residence, I take the agreement between the
analogous issue at the centre of other debates terms of my analysis and Powell's early data to
currently raging in Pacific ethnology over Sa- be particularly significant. As for possible
moa and Hawai'i. Powell argues that I and the changes in residence in the villages of the
modern ethnographers on whose data I have Omarakana cluster just prior to the time Powell
relied have either ignored the extent of change conducted his 1950-51 research, it would be
in Trobriand society and culture resulting from expected anyhow that the presence of potential
post-war European influences, or failed to rec- claimants to the Tibalu and Kwainama or
ognize how our perceptions of the evidence Bwaydaga guyau titles and the corresponding
have been influenced by our Western cultural absence of the sons ofguyau who have assumed
(or anthropological) predilections. Hence, to the leadership of their own subclans would
Powell, the elements of my model linking 'fa- skew the figures in the direction Powell indi-
thers', 'leaders' and 'chiefs' reflect merely the cates. Even so, in 1950-51 only a minority of
recent historical influence of Christian notions the Omarakana men who gardened for women
of benevolent paternal deity. resided in their own subclan villages (Powell
Once again, in misconstruing what my analy- 1969: 581). It should be noted also that my dis-
sis attempts to do, Powell's charges entail their cussion (Mosko 1995: 776) of Montague's
own refutation. Read carefully, my analysis (1978; 1989: 30-1; see also Montague 1995: 57)
consists in showing how quite various practices account of gardening labour and kaymata ex-
comprising the politico-ritual agency distinctivechange at the village cluster level adds a long-
to the categories 'father', 'leader' and 'chief' term temporal dimension to this pattern which
conform to a single pattern of kopoi ('feeding')Powell's early data do not address.
and kuli ('forming'), and how that pattern may It must be conceded that any of these ele-
be relevant to dynamic processes of historical ments of Trobriand culture may have changed
transformation involving local and regional as a result of Western influence. Indeed, I try to
leadership. Read carefully, Powell's critique show how variations in the scale of chiefly in-
does not directly address even one of the many fluence and village leadership can be linked
contexts of 'feeding' or 'forming' I examine. He with the dynamic potentialities of both expan-
comes close, however, when he discusses sion and contraction implied in my model. And
urigubu 'marriage tribute', which he takes to it isbestill possible that I and other investigators
given by men of a subclan to their married have sis- not accounted sufficiently for these
ters or sisters' husbands. In the terms of my changes. But for the paternal images of 'feed-
analysis, these prestations (kaymwila) are in the ing' and 'forming', what is the evidence of
first instance 'fed' by a 'father' to a married change? The evidence I have cited of 'feeding'
daughter, affecting the 'form' of her relations. and 'forming' by 'fathers', 'leaders' and 'chiefs'
After a number of years they are taken over byis distributed in reports written throughout the
her brother in place of the 'father'. Helpfully,colonial era, not just during recent decades.
Powell concedes that his early data (Powell However, when Powell posits that changes
1960; 1969) are consonant with the categories have taken place as a result of alien contact, he
of exchange comprising my analysis. The criti- gives no precise indication of how or when
cal point, however, is why 'fathers' should be Trobrianders' thinking about 'feeding' and
involved in these kaymwila exchanges at all. For 'forming' has changed, or that it has changed at
Powell, it is because young men all.
could not appear to play any part in their sisters' None of this should be taken to confirm
sexual or reproductive activities, and their fathers Powell's further contention that my usage of
might make gardens for them until theywere old ethnographic and historical sources is aimed to-
enough and had become ... 'distant' enough from wards definitively reconstructing 'pre-Euro-
the girls they grew up with to garden for them pean "meaning". At no point do I project my
without risk to their respect relationship. analysis beyond the historical epochs from
But if urigubu (sic) is a corporate gift from men which those ethnographic reports arose.
of the woman's subclan (Powell 1969), why is it So at what point is there strong evidence of
not other older men of her subclan already 'dis- a discontinuity in Trobriand thinking occa-
tant' enough from her who are expected to do sioned by the intrusion of Western notions of

This content downloaded from 104.244.125.2 on Thu, 31 May 2018 00:29:33 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 158 COMMENT

paternity? I suggest that this evidence arises tablish them among extracted parts of unrelated
when apparently indigenous notions of 'feed- societies in accordance with foreign theories
ing' and 'forming' have been construed as self- rather than among relativistically connected
evident instances of Western ideology regarding elements and patterns of the same culture.
the Christian God's paternal 'benevolence' or As to why I choose to ignore Spiro's (1984)
moral sense of 'good'. As far as I know, the no- psychoanalytic account of Trobriand 'father-
tions of divine 'benevolence' and 'good' have hood', I can point first to the sound criticisms
entered this discussion entirely by way of Pow- Powell (1986) himself has enumerated, among
ell's a priori reasoning. Some association of 'be-them the untestability and pronounced Euro-
nevolence' and moral 'good' with 'feeding' may centrism of Spiro's Freudian methods and
make intuitive sense to a Westerner, but I am theories. But my article is not focused on 'fa-
not so sure it would to Trobrianders in all the therhood' but on 'chieftainship', of which Spiro
senses of kopoi I have considered, whether in has written virtually nothing that I am aware.
Seligman's and Malinowski's time or now. Nonetheless, it can be demonstrated that the
Similarly, it has yet to be shown how'benevo- central assumption on which Spiro based his
lence' and 'good' might equate with kuli 'form- theory of a Trobriand Oedipal complex - 'the
ing' and 'de-forming'. As I emphasize in my ar- Absent-Father Pattern' in Trobriand dreams,
ticle (Mosko 1995: 763, 780-1), the dynamics myth and reproduction beliefs (Spiro 1982: 46-
of Trobriand 'feeding', 'forming' and 'de-form- 73) - is ethnographically false. First, Spiro read-
ing' in contexts of procreation, infant care, theily admits that the 'father's' supposed absence
bestowal of magic and sorcery, explanations forin Trobrianders' dreams is 'entirely speculative'
sickness and health, yam distribution, land ten- (1982: 49). Second, he shows clearly that the
ure, marital exchange, mortuary de-conception, 'father' is represented symbolically in Trobriand
local and regional integration, and so on, are, ifmyths after all, often undisguised (1982: 49-
anything, strongly counter-intuitive to most 57). Third, and most importantly, on the basis
Western understanding and practice. Moreover, of the distinctive 'feeding' and 'forming' contri-
butions I have outlined in Trobriand reproduc-
even allowing that a benevolent image of fa-
tion beliefs (Mosko 1985: 210-12, 226, 227,
therhood and deity has entered Trobriand con-
229, 230; 1995: 767) as well as in infant care,
sciousness from European sources, Powell has
the provision of food and warmth, physical re-
yet to explain why it should influence Trobri-
semblance, the bestowal of beauty magic, an-
and notions of 'father', 'leader' and 'chief' alike
nual yam exchange, mortuary de-conception
- unless, of course, those categories were al-
and so on, 'fathers' are, if anything, omnipres-
ready associated in Trobriand culture, either
ent in Trobriand thought, practice and sociality.
consciously or unconsciously, before the sup-
By this I am led to pose another 'chieftain-
posed foreign influences were introduced. Re-
ship' analogy. At the outset of my article I ar-
gardless of its empirical merits, Powell's histo-
gued that most comparative analysts have
ricist position presupposes the cultural
viewed the Trobriand case with foreign precon-
metaphors comprising mine.
ceptions of 'chieftainship'. As a result, the in-
As to whether Trobrianders were not con-
digenous understandings and practices of
scious of the 'father-leader-chief' analogies be-
'chiefly' agency have been consistently miscon-
fore 1970, this can never be known. My own
strued. Following Leach (1961: 27) once again,
guess is that at least some Trobrianders have
I venture the parallel point for Trobriand 'fa-
been aware of those linkages even if their ob-
therhood'. The problem may not always be a
servers have not. What can be ventured with
failure to identify historical changes or exoge-
confidence is that the various named associa- nous influences in the ethnographic record;
tions outlined in my article have been consis- rather, burdened with preconceptions of what
tently reported by a great many investigators. 'fathers' are or ought to be in their own culture,
This implies that connexions between 'father', scholars have frequently been inhibited from
'leader' and 'chief' categories have been part of comprehending unfamiliar indigenous mean-
the public realm of Trobriand symbolism, dis- ings. As with 'chiefs', Trobrianders and other
course and sociality for a considerable time. Pacific Islanders may indeed not have 'fathers',
Ironically, perhaps, it may not be in the post- at least as Westerners understand them. But this
1970s historical changes or in the information I does not mean they lack something else.
have organized that influences of Western ide-
MAK S. MosKo
ology can most readily be spotted, but in Pow-
ell's own constructions of Trobriand 'tradition'. University of Auckland
Rather than portray Trobriand 'fathers' in ac-
cordance with Trobriand notions of person-
hood, agency or sociality, Powell looks to Aus-Leach, E. 1961. Rethinking anthropology. In
trian families from which Freud derived the Rethinking anthropology (LSE Monogr. social
Oedipus complex' to model Tiobriand family Anthrop. 22). London: Athlone Press.
relationships see also Powell 1986). So Powell Montague, S. 1978. Life in two worlds: the
does not always reject analogy and metaphor as social organization of a Trobriand village.
useful analytical tropes; he merely prefers to es- Unpublished ms.

This content downloaded from 104.244.125.2 on Thu, 31 May 2018 00:29:33 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 COMMENT 159

1989. To eat for the dead: Kaduwagan
mortuary events. In Death rituals and Ife in
the societies of the kula ring (eds) EH. Damon I believe I have found the original source of
& R. Wagner. DeKalb: Northern Illinois
Univ. Press.
1995. Kaduwaga: a Trobriand boat
harbor. In Seafaring in the contemporary(1842-1931), world
(ed.) R. Feinberg. DeKalb: Northern Illinois
Univ. Press.
Mosko, M. 1985. Tikopia and the Trobriands. In
Quadripartite structures: categories, relations and
homologies inBushMekeo Culture. Cambridge:
Univ. Press.
1995. Rethinking Trobriand
chieftainship. J. R. anthrop. Inst. (N.S.) 1,
763-85.
Powell, H.A. 1956. An analysis of present day
social structure in the Tiobriand Islands.
Thesis, University of London.
1960. Competitive leadership in
Trobriand political organisation.J. R. Renan,
Inst. (N.S.) 90, 118-45.
1968. Letter, Virgin birth. Man (N.S.)
3, 651-2.
1969. Territory, hierarchy and kinship ties and to the works of his German and British
in Kiriwina. Man (N.S.) 4, 580-604.
1986. Review of Spiro 1984. Man.
(N.S.) 21, 380-1.
1995. Seamanship and politics in
northern Kiriwina. In Seafaring in the
contemporary world (ed.) R. Feinberg. DeKalb:
Northern Illinois Univ. Press.
Spiro, M. 1984. Oedipus in the Trobriands.
Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
French origins of The golden bough
Frazer's The golden bough in two essays by the
French scholar Henri Gaidoz. The fact is not
recorded in the current literature. Gaidoz
a contemporary of the other emi-
nent French Celtologist Henry-Marie d'Arbois
de Juainville, wrote La religion gauloise et legui de
chne (Paris, Leroux, 1881) and Deux paralleles:
Rome et le Congo (published in Revue de l'Histoire
des Religions 7, 5-16, 1883).
Gaidoz was a follower of the comparative
method, interested in the two main topoi of the
importance of the golden bough in Celtic my-
thology and of Nemi's priest, who is killed by
his substitute. The two themes are, of course,
the leitmotiv of Frazer's speculation. The Scot-
tish anthropologist probably never directly read
Gaidoz, but was influenced by Ernest Renan's
philosopical drama Le pretre de Nemi, and
anthrop.as a reader of the influential Revue de
l'Histoire des Religions, was surely acquainted
with Gaidoz's writings. Frazer's work is usually
compared to his German sources and authori-
admirers and followers, but the presence in his
work of French culture, if we except his per-
sonal friends, such as Renan and Salomon Rei-
nach, is less acknowledged.
CRISTIANO CAMPORESI
Universitd degli Studi di Firenze

This content downloaded from 104.244.125.2 on Thu, 31 May 2018 00:29:33 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms