I

NS

lDIES

MARKETS
II

IN

AFRICA

EDITED PAULBOHANNAN

BY

AND GEORGE DALTON

NORTHWESTERN

UNIVERSITY

PRESS

n~-----------~"""
Published 1962 by Northwestern
Library of Congress

UniversityPress

Catalog Number: 61-12383

This volume was prepared as part of The Human Environments in Middle Africa Project,National Academyof Sciences-National Research Council. It was financed by Quartermaster Research and Engineering Command, under

Contract No. DA-19-129-AM-1309.

Printed in the Netherlands by J oh. Eriscbede en Zcnen

The ideas which are here expressed so laboriously dyeextremely simple and should be obvious. The difficulty lies, not in the new ideas, but in escaping from the old ones, which ramify, for those brought up as most of us have been, into every corner of our minds.
JOHN MAYNARD KEYNES

xvin Metropolitan (old) 1'1,111("'. III 1'I~,(i. I ir, U.S.A. The Ethiopian do ll.i r III l'lfiO \\,1, ("qut\ Maria Theresa dollar is 11\) Illll~C"1 )cJ.{.d In 1 tor evaluating livestock .u ul otlu-r c'\.}lC-O'.Vf exchange rate varied 1"1 (1111 \ 1.'1!i In :!;n Since most 0 r til esc s I 11d 1('\ \\ <:1{' WI it f {" 11. both in the issuing' agcllC'\ ,Illd tile v.i l u e- (

c:

. I.

\ II n

equalro!

CONTENTS

.10

.. A. T
Preface by M. J. Herskovits. Editors' Note List of Maps and Figures List of Tables . Introduction by Paul Bohannan and George
THE GUINEA COAST AND THE Vll
XVll XXI XXll

ut was them

he black mad
1.

,lIrt h. \ been cha~ or som f the curreno

Dalton.

CONGO

0
f'3.

I. The Rural Wolof of the Gambia. David Ames 2. African Traders in Central Sierra Leone . . v-..eroon R Dorjabn -------Traditional Market Economy in the South Dahomey , Claudine and Claude Tardits '1'. The Yoruba Rural Market. B. W. Hodder '5. Afikpo Markets: 1900-1960. Simon and Phoebe Ottenberg 6. The Bulu Response to European Economy. George R. Horner 7. Trade and Markets Among the Kuba . Jan Vansina 8. Lele Economy Compared with the Bushong: A Study of Economic Backwardness. Mary Douglas
THE WESTERN SUDAN

29

61

I I8 170 190 -

211

9. Trade and Markets among the Mossi People. Elliott P. Skinner 110. Social and Economic Factors Affecting Markets in Guro Land . ~ Claude Meillassoux ~ Exchange and Marketing among the Hausa . Michael G. Smith 12. Trade and Markets in the Economy of the Nomadic Fulani of Niger (Bororo) Marguerite Dupire
THE HORN OF AFRICA

237 -

279 -

299-

33"5-

13. Trade-and Markets I. M. Lewis

in Northern Somali land .

365

xx
14.

The Abyssinian

\L!lk(l

(n\\11

15.

Simon D.i\lcsSllq .. !, "'"",11("111 1 ~ Il\,fd) The Konso }'..,COIII)I Richard Kj ur-k holm
1''''1 \11(1(

l' (htnpl
I. 2. 3. 4. orth
111 Tan-

- The Evolut io n () I 17.

16.

\111'.11.1

l i.rd c-

P.H.Gu 11-' rver Livestock Mark or , .llllII11f.!, ganyika . .

,I".

11."1" .. I

5. 6. I 7. 8. 9.
10,

E. H. WJI1ter 111.1 ~Ilnlo \'dl.l~" Economic E"cl"ll1g, Robert F. Gray I. I tO 19.' Land Use, Trade a nr I II,,(.lOwllt 01 \I.u .. IlOI in Kipsigis Country R. A. Manners ._ 20. Wealth and POWer in Cmlliolnd Robert LeVine .......21. Zande Markets and COllln"'1l e Conrad C. Rein ing da ~ 22. Trade and Markers arnonA' 1 Ire " 1."n-h.ll,10[ '!fan John Middleton 18.
CE~ rRA' \FIUC,

ll}'

1'11. 12.

n3.
14.

05.
16.

;117.
18.

23. 24.
25.

Rural Rhodesian Markels . Robert 1. Rotberg Trade and Wealth amollg t h Elizabeth Colson Bridewealth and other Forms Herero . Gordonn. Gibson
CITIES AND INDU

T(lI1~

19. 20, 21. ~22. 23. ~ 24. j25. 26.

TR,I

1.

O. 'I'L

26.

27.
28.

The Marketing of Staple Fo d A. B. MUkwaya The Koforidua Market Daniel F. McCall

in

K.111

African Markets and Trade in th Marvltl P. Miracle References Index,

rbelt

MAPS

AND

FIGURES

"I

utlh

111

Tan

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 111. 12. ;~ 13. 14. ;:15. 16. ;117. 18. 19. 20. 21. ~22. 23. ~ 24.

('

\1.1I

Ii. I

cotlOI11Y

11.1 O[

Itanda

Location of Tribes and Areas Represented in this study xxvi Sierra Leone . . . . . . . . 63 Kolifa Mayoso (Temne) 72 Akinyele Area (Yoruba) . 105 Olusun Village and Market (Yoruba) 107 Sketch Map of Eke Market (Ibo) . 136 AverageLength of Dry Season. . 212 Population Density (Lele and Bushong) 213 Forest Cover (Lele and Bushong) . 231 Age at Retirement from Work (Lele and Bushong) 231 Period of Full Work (Leie and Bushong) 232 Economy and Social Organization 281 Towns, Villages, Foreigners' Markets and Gura Markets 282 Tribal Settlements of the Guro 284 Relation of Markets to Forests (Gura) . 355 Markets of Niger (Fulani) . 387 Caravan Trails and Roads to Gondar . 668 Koforidua and its Hinterland 669 SchematicMap of Koforidua, Showing Land Use. 672-73 Koloridua Market 684 Koforidua Marketing Area. 699 The Copperbelt and its Hinterland 704 Location of Tribes on the Copperbelt. AvcrazeSeasonal Variation in the Number 01 Sellers in o 709 Selected Rhodesian Copperbelt Markets . ' ... Production and Net Imports 01 the Major Commodities 718 Marketed in the Congo Sector of the Copperbelt. . . Proportion 01 Major Imports to Congo Copperbelt [rom 720-21 Principal Zones of Supply. . . . 727 Conditions lor Barter of Fish (Copperbelt) .

'P

rbelt

CHAPTERS

Lele Economy Compared with the Bushong

A STUDY OF ECONOMIC BY MARY BACKWARDNESS DOUGLAS

The Lele' and the Bushong' are separated only by the Kasai River. Toe two tribes recognize a common origin, their houses, clothes and craftsare similar in style, their languages are closely related.' Vet the Leleare poor, while the Bushong are rich. The Lele produce only for subsistence, sharing their goods, or distributing them among themselvesas gifts and fees. The Bushong have long been used to producingfor exchange, and their native economy was noted for its use of money and its specialists and markets. Everything that the Lele haveor can do, the Bushong have more and can do better. They produce more, live better, and populate their region more densely. The first question is whether there are significant differences in the physical environment of the two peoples. Both live in the lat. 5 Degrees, in the area of forest park merging into savannah, which borders the south of the Congo rain forest. They both have a heavy annual rainfall of 1400to 1600 mm. (40 to 60 inches) per annum. The meanannual temperature is about 78F. (25C.).As we should expect fromtheir proximity, the climatic conditions are much the same for bothtribes. Nonetheless, a curious discrepancy appears in their respective assessments of their climate. The Bushong, like the local Europeans, welcome the dry season of mid-May to mid-August as a cold season, Whereasthe Lele regard it as dangerously hot. The Bushong in the
. ~1) The Lele are a tribe, inhabiting the west border of the gakuba Empire. They are dlV,lded into three chiefdoms, of which only the most westerly has been studied. The ChIefof the eastern Lele at Perominenge apes Kuba fashions in his little capital; the men wear basketry hats held ' pins, the chief has some of the dress and on with metal parap,hernalia of the Nyirni. How much deeper this resemblance goes, it is impossible to sa~, Stnce conditions at the time of field work were not favorable for study of this chiefdom. Everything that is said here concerning the Lele refers to the western Lele, ~hosechief, When visits were made in 1949-50 and 1953, was Norbert Perc Mihondo. Insrt field work was carried out under the generous auspices of the International African Slllute, and of the Institut de Recherche Scientifi-que en Afrique Centrale. 19t) The Bushong are the ruling tribe of the Kuba Kindom: They wer~studied in 3-56 by Dr. Vansina to whom I am deeply indebted for hIS collaboratIOn and for .pPI . ' ymg unpublished information for this paper. (3) According to the Lexico-statistical survey conducted by Dr. Vansina, there is anBOp . er cent Similarity between the two languages.

212

Mary Douglas

north tend to have a dry season ten days shorter (Bultot 1954) than most of the Lele, (see figure 7), and the Lele soils retain less moisture. and the vegetation is thinner, so that the impression of drought, more severe, but otherwise there seems no objectively measurabh

difference in the climate to account for their attitudes.

~.

'0, OJ

."

BUSHONG

LE L E
,

80 85

:'
0

~;;

90
95 100

FIGURE

Average Length of Dry Season

Expressed

in Days

(from: F. Buitat - "Saisonset Periodes Seches et Phwieuses au Congo Beige." Bruxelles, 1954)

There are certain! " ' d ' ge ani veg 'T YImportant differences in the sad, ram. , etatmn he LeI di , 'I belo,," e are isnncrlv less fortunate Then sal s ' t o t1 ie most east l' . nd [", sorne s t h er y extensIOn of the Kwango plateau system, a d" x era safe In tl 'I' . On J'" 'I ie sten uy characteristic of that regIOn, I"t Plateau , tlle 501safe t . teppe- I~

vegetation'

00

poor to support anything but a

dl

poor in assi~i~f~~e of the ample rainfall. The soils consist ai, ~~ magnates or heav e mmerals of any kind, lacking altogether 11 ,hit of benefitin fr y mmerals, and so permeable that they are Incaj on: side of tire gK am Rtheheavy rainfall' (see fizure 8), On ti,e BuSle~. deposits, particularl
(4) We

asai

Iver tl

. ie

SOL

"I'

IS

at iron are, occur. . are very gratefUl t M rervurcn, for gu'd 0 ,1. Cahen , Director I ance on the ! .'. P iysical environment

altogether richer, an trr ii Whereas Lele cov "

' C T/110 Brl, of the Musee du 0" . of the tWO wbes.

".

d nun

.z--

o o

o
Z

z
-e

~
;
o

= s
-e >

,
z
0

, 0

,
0

~ ~

z z

z
0
::

0 u

o >
v
w

"

~ ;:,.

.
0.
o

>

~.D
;

.
o

214

Mary Douglas

characterized by rolling grasslands with forest galleries along theri.. banks, Bushong country is relatively well-forested, although ~, sketch map tends to exaggerate the forested area on their side or the Kasai. 'Withsuch important differences in their basic natural resource we are not surprised that Lele country is poorer and more sparself populated. But how much poverty and how Iowa density can Ix attributed to the environmental factor? Can we leave the matter here: There is no certain method of estimating the extent to whie! environment itself limits the development of an area. The Pend, of Cungu, immediate neighbors of the Lele, inhabit an area even poorer in soils than the Lele area, and as poor as those worked byth, notoriously wretched Suku of Kahemba and Feshi. The Lele aT poor, but the Suku are known as a miserable, dispirited peopk incapable of exploiting to the full such resources as their [JOOI

environment offers. The Pende are famous as energetic cultivator!

well-nourished and industrious. All three peoples grow differen staple crops; the Pen de, millet; the Suku, manioc; the Lele, maiU There is obviously no end to the speculation one could indulge> to what the potentialities of the environment might be. I C ong~ geographers have been much occupied by the quesuon . 0I the relation between soil and population density. The whole Belgian Congo ISan area of very low density. Fifty per cent of its surface h~ a populatIOn of less than 2.4 to the square kilometer (roughly 6~. square mtle) (Courou 1955: 4). It is generally agreed (Gourou 19" CitesCohen; N rcolai 1952: 247) that there is a rough correlatIOn ~ poor sandy soils with low densities, insofar as the small stretch 01 ,elalively more pl opu ous Country Occurs In a favore d gap betll''''. the Kwango "kalahari" plateau and sands to the north. Howeve" II IS also agreed that soil poverty in itself is not an adequate explanauon of the pockets of extra low density which occur especially on tI' second a d fif h 'sa" em I . n t parallels of South latitude. Professor Gouron be I I~JatlCally and repeatedly that the sterility of the soils cannot l ~e to(5account for all the densities of less than 2 to the square k~~ e 57 \eO'9' N;othe square mile) in the Bela-ian Congo (Gourou 1955:. " , ,I Icola11952) InN I e lIU!lunatin. case.The Ndemb .' Ort iern Rhodesia we have an 1 mil1 in many U lIve at an average density of 6 to the squarfe I cal c I' areas at a density of only 3 but according to a care u u auon of the capa' f thei . helf o' methods tl cuy 0 t ieir land, worked according to t . u 01 , ie area should b bl . pulatIO from 17 to 38 tie capa e of supportIng a po '1 mele[l (Turner 1957). at 'ie square mile, (6.8 to 15 per square klo

J n shOrt We can
,

not assume, as some have done, that there

is all\

8. Lele Economy Compared

with the Bushong

215

universal tendency to maximize Eood production (Harris 1959), or thatthe food resources of a region are the only factor limiting its population. Forthe Lele and the Bushong the relative densities are as follows. Theterritory of ]V[ weka, where the Bushong live, has an average density of 4-5 to the square kilometer (11 to the square mile). The BCK railway running through the area has attracted an immigrant population of Luba. If we abstract the railway zone from ourfigures, we findthat the Bushong proper live at a density of (Gourou 1955: 109) only3 or 4 to the square kilometer, (7-10 to the square mile). TheLele" inhabit Basongo territory, where the average density is from 2to4 to the square kilometer (5-7 to the square mile), but since theLele account for only half the population (among recent irnmigrams of foreign tribesmen to work in the Brabanta oil concession, refinery and port, and among Cokwe hunters), we can suppose that until recently Lele themselves used to live at a mere 1.7 to the square kilometer (4 to the square mile). When the geographers agree that poverty of soil is not a sufficient explanation for the degree of poverty prevailing in similar areas, we areJustified m looking for a sociological explanation to supplement theeffect of environmental factors. For one thing, it is obvious that thedemographic factor works two ways. Low density is partly the ::SUlt ofinferior technology, applied to inferior resources, but it may soinhibitdevelopment by hampering enterprises which need largescale collaboration. In I:lVe nowconsider technology, we find many suggestive differences. ertamprocesses marked superiority would be likely to increase ~utput. Others are proof oEa higher standard of living. Surveying I:ese, wefind that in hunting, fishing and housebuilding, the Bushong "rker IIses more specialized materials and equipment than the Lele, ~m~ . . Tak uvauon he spends more energy and ume, . . . and e huntmg first, since the Lele are passionately interested in It th. pnde themselves on their skill (Douglas 1954). In the eyes of el~nelghbors,it seems that they are notorious as inefficient hunters, partlcularly because they do not use nets and only rarely make pit ltaps. ' mHuntingis the only occupation in which large numbers of Lele e~regUlarlycombine. They reckon that fifteen to twenty men and
t)Accordin la ti f II ibes lOtthe Bas g to P. Couron, 1951, the average density of the popu auon 0 a m e IS 3 longo-port Francqui region in which the Lele now account for only half, o 4 to tl ie square kilometer. This ' . nUlllb agrees with calculations base d on t h e to tal er or Lei . . b l 63hy I . e 10 that area, about 26,000, and the extent of their rerrrtory, a ou llj. klll.IO 1T1I1es, which give a Lele density of roughly 4 to the square mile. or ].7 to the

216

Mary Douglas

len dogsare necessary for a good hunt. Using nets, the Bushong netd a teamof only ten men, and can hope to do well with five. In shon the Bushong hunter uses better capital equipment, and his hoursol huntingare more productive. Whyshould the Lele not have nets? The materials are presemin the foreston both sides of the river, and the Lele know what netsart Makinga net is presumably a long task. In view of the local delores. ation and the resulting paucity of game, it may be a case in which costlycapital equipment is simply not worthwhile. Bushong netsorr made by their women. Perhaps the rest of the answer lies in differentdivision of Jabor between men and women in each tribe and the larger proportion of the total agricultural work which lei. leaveto their women. Whatever the reason, we note that the absenc of netsis consistent with a general Lele tendency not to invest tim. and labor in long-term equipment. The same applies to pit-traps. Lele know how to make these,and frequentlytalk about them. The task requires a stay in the forest 01 severaldays and nights, or regular early dawn journeys and latere turns.The traps are hard work to dig with only a blunt matcherfor spade,and once set, they need to be watched. In practice fewmen ever trouble to make them. I suspect that the reason in this case' again that the amount of game caught by pit-traps tends to be ell> appomtmgm relation to the effort of making them, and that the Lek have felt discouraged when using a technique which is more pro ductivem the thicker forestson the other side of the river. Lest it be. thought that the Lele neglect capital.intensive ai~ becausehunting ISa Sport, a pleasure, and a religious aetlvlty, JetDl deny any parallel WIth English fox-hunting. The Lele would hal' applaudedthe French Brigadier of fiction who used his sabre to sial the lox. Their eager purchase of firearms whenever they can get W' moneyand the license showsthat their culture does not restrict thelJl to mlenor techni I . coJlal> . iques wlen these do not reqmre long-term oranon and effort. In fishingthe L I areaI" . we' 11 vaterol bee so interior Their country IS .

w.

a~~trea~s and rivers, and bounded ;n two sides by the great K;':. K on t e west by the SWift-flowing Loange Along the banks a as" are fishmg villages, whose men dot the river with elabaI'lt' traps and fishing plat! T I Ding>!, 01 Bushong d arms. hese fishermen are most y Kasai. Lelewo~~~ u~~~often Lele.In one northern village, near theviJlagt where lack' I to go every two days to the nearest Dmga rill! mania'c Comg c alms of kinship, they obtained fish by barte n~ gooda; Ii I mpared with the Bushong the. Lele as a whole are 'b< s ling, nor at d deser' canoe makmg. There is no nee to

8. Lele Economy Compared

with the Bushong

217

indetailthe diversity and elaborate character of Bushong fishing equipment, but it is worth noting that in some types of fishing, using several canoes trailing nets, the team may consist of twenty men or more. These skills may be a legacy from their distant past, since the Bushong claim to have entered their territory in canoes along the Kasairiver, while the Lele claim to have travelled overland (Vansina 1955) and to have found the river banks already occupied by Dinga 6shing villages. It theLele were originally landsmen, and the Bushong originally fishermen, this might account for more than the latter's present technical superiority in fishing. For primitive fisherman are necessarily more heavilyequipped than are primitive hunters and cultivators. The needfor fishing tackle, nets, lines, hooks, traps, curing platforms, a~dforwatercraft as well as for weirs and dams makes quite a different balance in the allocation of time between consumer's and producers' goods. If they started in this area with the typical balance ofa fishing economy, this may have meant an initial advantage for theBushong in the form of a liabit of working for postponed consumption . . Bethatas it may, Lele mostly leave fishing to their women. Their Simple method is to block a slow-moving stream, so as to turn the n"restvalleyinto a marsh. In this they make mud banks and ponds, ~h~re theyset traps for fish scarcely bigger than minnows. A mornmgs"ork draining out such a pond and catching the fish floundering mth . e mudYields a bare pint or so of fish. In the 0 dry season they make a twoday expedition to the Lumbund ji, where they spread a sapona~~u:vegetable poison over the low waters, and pull out the suffocated As yhand,or in baskets. I to housing, Lele and Bushong huts look much alike. They are ~wlrectangular huts, roofed with palm thatch. The walls are covered 1111f I ro"s a f sp I' I It bamboos or palm ribs, lashed onto layers a f pa Imh'" on a frame of strong saplings. Deceptive in appearance, Lele Il~when . than those of.the Bus I in . new Ioak much sturdier long, b ut qUi:~ctlCe they last less well: the Lele hut is more rou.ghly and pa' Y made. A well-built one will last about six years WIthout resu:'and, as they are capable of being renewed piecemeal, by the theStlhtlltIon of new walls or roof thatch, they are not replaced until Walevill age IS . moved to a new site, and the owner d ecrid es t h a t heh hUt as neglected his hut so long that it will not stand removal. A n eigh:goodcondition is transported to a new site, with from six to Bu ~en carrying the rooE,and four at a time carrying the walls. diffe Song huts are also transportable They are made with slightly rent m . . f h atenals. For the roof thatch, they use the leaves ate

218

Mmy Douglas

raffiapalm, as do the Lele.For the walls, they use the reputedlym waterproof leaves of a dwarf palm growing in the marshes. Over insteadof palm ribs split in half, they sew narrow strips of bam' where available. Lele consider bamboo to be a tougher wood' palm, but it is rare in their region. The narrow strips are held placeby stitching in pleasinggeometric patterns (N icolai & Ja~ 1954: 272ff). A rich Bushong man, who can command labor," build a hut that will last much longer than the ordinary man'r] up to fifteen years without major repairs. The palace of the Nyimi Mushenge, which was stilJ in good condition in 1956, had originally built in 1920. The Bushong use an ingenious technique of ventilation, a mO.\'a nap between the roof and the walls, which lets out smoke. It IS" possible to say whether they do this because their building ist solid to let the smoke filter throuzh the walls or whether dle)' o ' more fastidious and painstaking about their comfort than the lr whosehuts do certainly retain some of the smoke of their fires. Within the hut, the furnishings illustrate the difference in mate wealth,for the Bushong have a much greater refinement of dam .. goods.They Sit on stools,lay their heads on carved neck rests (oft necessaryto accommodate an elaborate hair style). They eat basketryplates, with iron or wooden spoons. They have a biggernt of specialized basketry Orwooden containers for food, clotlUng'd rneucs. A man who has more than one hat needs a hat box an placefor his metal hat pins. Lele do not make fibre hats, and ani' fewmen III a village may possess a skin hat. The beautiful Bush casketsfor cosmetics are prized objects in many European museu Whena Lele woman has prepared some cosmetic [Tom cam wood,' usesn at once, and there is rarely enouzh left over for it to be wof. stormgm a specia . I'Colltamer.Only a young 0 mother who, bei erngcar' for by her own mother after her delivery has nothing else to do ~m~ camwood for herselfand the baby, s;ores the prepared oinu;'" III ~ It~e hangmg baskethooked into the wall, enough for a fewf . Was Impressedwith the high protein content a " BliSlong Ir. ansma diet, "tl I I the)a, . ' ~l 1 t ie aycrequantities of fish and meat and the vanety hei f 0 . f ah,' bei I ill t eir ood. The Lele give an impreSSiOn 0 . ern' lungry al d . b d las" 0 .' ways reammg of meat often aoing to e T because theIr sto h 'tl r talka lot b hun revoltsat the idea of a vegetable suppe :me> lessnessa~dO~~hrnger, and ihiobe, an untranslatable word 1~ln.e crops and I essness. The Bushong cultivate a WIder r '"" a so QTow Cit fr ws Ula.il" Sligarcane and rus. 1I1ts, pineapples, pawpa , ab~ in the L I ananas, which are either rare or completely e e economy.

8. Lele Economy Compared

with the Bushong

219

Inshort,the Bushong seem to be better sheltered, better fed, better supplied with goods, and with containers for storing what they do notimmediately need. This is what we mean by saying that the Ilu,hong are richer than the Lele. As to village-crafts, such as carving and smithing, the best 01 the Lele products can compete in quality wilhBushong manufacture, but they are much scarcer. The Lele are more used to eating and drinking out of folded gTeen leaves tban Irom the basket plates and carved beakers common among the Bn,hong. Their medical instruments, too, are simpler. If, instead 01 cutting down a gourd top, they carve a wooden enema funnel for a baby, theymake it as fine and thin as tbey can, but do not adorn it Wilh theelaborate pattern lound on some Bushong examples. Beforeconsidering agriculture, we should mention the method of storing grain, for this is a rough index 01 output. Both Lele and Bushonghouses are built with an internal grain store, suspended from theroof or supported on posts over the hearth. Here grain and evenfish and meat can be preserved from the ravagesof damp and 01 msects bythe smoke 01 the fire. Most Lele women have no other grain 'tore. Bushong women find this too small and use external granaries, built like little buts, raised a lew leet above ground. These granaries, ofwhich there may be one or two in a Lele village, are particularly characteristic of the southern Bushono- villages, while in tbe north the huts whichare built in the fields fo~ a man to sleep in during the ~nodofheaviest agricultural work are used as temporary granaries. hhe Leleare not in the habit 01 sleeping in their fields, except to , OatWIldpig while the grain is ripening. This may be another mdlCatio n tI rat t I' ley do less agncultural work than th e B us h ong. Whenwe examine the techniques of cultivation, we find many Contrasts. The Bushong plant five crops in succession in a system 01 rotatonthat covers two years. Tbey <TrOW yams, sweet potatoes, manioc e . . harvests , b eans, and gather two and sometimes three maize a year. Th L Ie practice . no rotatIon lee and reap onI Yone annua I' maize ~rvhest. IEwe examine the tWOagricultural cycles,we see that the B llSongWark continuously . b all the year, and that the Le le e h ave one urst of activity, lastinz about six weeks in the height of the dry se ason. 0 ' T~ereis the probable explanation of their dread oEthe dry season. ... . th e average man thl Y te ere" ' in f act, surpnsmgly little range III 2o~P;ratures through the year. For the coldest month, July, it is only No~e~~s than the hottest month, January (Vandenplas 1947 : 33-38). hom eless, the Europeans and the Bushong welcome the period lheymid-May to mid-Auzust as the "cold season", probably because enjoythe cooler nizhts and tbe freedom from humidity. But the
e

220

Mary Douglas

Lele, enduring the sun heating on them from a cloudless sky whil, they are trying to do enough agricultural work for the whole year. suffer more from the dust and impurities in the atmosphere and from tile greatly increased insolation. The relatively cooler nights rna) make them feel the day's heat even more intensely. Apart [Tom the differences in crops cultivated, we may note sam' differences in emphasis. Lele give hunting and weaving a high priority throughout the year, while the Bushong think of them a primarily dry-season activities. Traditionally, the Lele used to bum the grassland for big hums (in which five or six vi1lages combined for the day) at the end of the dry season, when the bulk of their agri. cultural work was done. If the first rains had already broken, so much the better for the prospects of the hunt, they said, as the animals would leave their forest watering places to eat the new shoots. As the end of the dry season is the time in which the firing could do the maximum damage to the vegetation, it has been forbidden by the administration, and if permission is given at all, the firina must be over by the be ginning of July. The Bushong used to bur; the grassland in mid-Mal or early] une, at the beginning of the dry season, when the sap had no;!ll.ogether died down in the grass. I he cycle of work described for the Lele is largely what the old men descr-ibe as their traditional practice. It was modified by the agricultural officers of the Belgian Congo. Lele are encouraged" ~ow malZ~ twice, for harvesting in November, and in April. Ma.01OC IS now mamly grown in the grassland, instead of in the forest clearJl1~' There are some changes in the plants cultivated. Voandzeia has been replaced by groundnuts, some hill rice is sown, and beans m some parts. These are largely treated as cash crops by the Lele, who sell them to the Europeans to earn money for tax. The other occupallO' which competes for their time is cutting oil-palm fruits to sell to the HUllenes du Co . '11 ngo B eIge, whose lorries co1lect wee kl Y fr ani the
~I f ages. Lele

complain

that they are now made to work harder than

e or~, to clear more land, keep it hoed grow more crops. They ne\'t~ camp am that cutting oilpalm fruits iruerferes with their agricultll": rogram, only that the total of extra work interferes with thtIf
PI

lUntlOg.

This is not th If' Iture. It . e I' ace or a detailed study of Bushong agriCtl d IS enough to hav h . . ed an is . e s own that It IS more energetically pursu .. more d productIve. One or two details of women's work are useful icauon, of a diffe . I like 10 eat twice a da . i rent attitude to time, work and food: Le e din the e . y. n the mornmg at about II o'clock or mIdday, an '" venmg. They Com I' h d only t often the ill' I' am t at their wives are lazy, an '001 Ol'Olllg meal conSIsts . of cold scraps horn t h e prev'

I'

8. Lele Economy Compared with the Bushong

221

night; they compare themselves unfavorably with Cokwe, who are reputed to have more industrious wives. In practice the Lele women seem to hevery hard-working, but it is possible that the absence of labor.saving devices may make their timetable more arduous.
TABLE 28

Annual Cycle ot Work

Bushong Lele

DrySeason \lid May

Harvest beans, maize II, yams. Clear

forest Burn grassland for hunt

Hunt, weave Clearforest for draw wine maize

June Mid'July to

Hunt, fish, weave, repair huts Burn forest clearings, gather bananas Aug.15th arid pineapple. Plant hemp Hunt, fish, plant sugarcane and
bananas

Women fish in low waters Burn forest clearings

Sow maize

Send tribute to capitalperiodof plenty

WCI Season ,IUdAugust Lift ground nuts

Fire grassland for

hunting Sowvoandzeia, plant

On,
Nov,

Sowground nut. Sow MaizeI Collect termites

manioc, bananas,
peppers; sugar cane. pineapples

MidDec,
Lillit Dry Season

(occasional) and raffia palms in forest clearings,

with maize

MidDec.

Sow maize II; sow voandzela Sow tobacco, sow maizeII Lift ground nuts, sowbeans collect termites and grubs' ' Reap maize 1 (Main crop) Reap maize 1. Sowtobacco,beans, yams, manioc Gather beans, sowvoandzeia and tobacco

J~.

Green maize can be plucked Maize harvest

Lift voandzeia

March Aprillo Mid.May

--------------------Forexa Itte mp 1e, one of their daily chores is to fetch water fr am t h e roo am. At the same time they carry down a heavy pile of manioc ~ to So ak f' Or a few days before carrying them back to t h e VI'11 age.

222

Map)' Douglas

Bushong women, on the other hand, are equipped with woede troughs,filled with rain water from the roofs, so that they can soak their manioc in the village,without the labor of transporting it bad and forth. Bushong women also cultivate mushrooms indoors 1m occasional relish, while Lele women rely on chance gathering. Bushong women find time to do the famous raffia embroider perhaps because their menfolk hel p them more in the fields. Lek men admiring the Bushong Velours) were amazed to learn that womencould ever be clever enough to use needle and thread, stil lessmake this eleborate stitching. The Bushong culinary tradition' mare varied than that of the Lele. This rough comparison sugg"' that Lele women are less skilled and industrious than Bushon women,but it is probable that a time-and-motion study of womens and men's work in the two economies would show that Lele men leavea relatively. heavier burden of aar icultural work to their women 0 for reasonswhich we shall show later. Another difference between Bushong and Lele techniques isin the exploitation of palms for wine. Lele use only the raffia palmfor wine.Their method of drawing it kills the tree; in the processcl tapplllg,. they Cut out the whole of the crown of the palm just at thl timeof Its first flowering. During the few years before the palmh~ matured to this point, they take the young yellow fronds for weavmg and after drawmg the sap for wine, the stump is stripped and leftto rot down. Lele have no use for a tree which has once been allo\\'~ to flower,except for fuel anelbuilding purposes. The life of a palm used 111 this way, is rarely more than five years although there seelm to be some range in the different times at which individual palmi
mature.

I The Bushong also use this method on raffia palms, but they hall
e~Inl to
In

tap all palms by making an incision at the base of the larg< orescene, a technique which does not kill the tree. Presumabh thIStechmque co Id b d k" f eros, Ri '. u e a apted to raffia palms, since the Ya 00 , att~~' Nigeria use it (Forde 1937). But neither Lele nor BushO~ pt to preserve the raffiapalm in this way and Lele do not dra' any Wille fr '1 ,. vI< nortl f h am 01 palms, althought these grow plentifully ill e i or r en territory. Accordin';:to Lele traditions oil palms we! very scarce In their;:' d this lDa( accoum fl' COuntryuntil relatively recently, an . 011 or t len not expl . . . f' h galU C sistentlywitl I OlUng It or wme. But ere a '. Ib di I 1 ot ler tendencies in their economy their technlql are irecred to shon t ' . ourCes. To b I . ~ erm results,and do not fully use theIr res Ir' a ance this pier f L I" d ntIOn t weavingof ffi f ure 0 e e inefficiency, we shoul me b tte! craftsmen ;~ .a, or here, at least, they are recognized as the ~ tho . err raffia cloth is of closer texture than Bushong c 0

8. Lele Economy Compared

with

the Bushong

223

because theyuse finer strands of raffia, produced by combing in three suges, whereas the Bushong only comb once. Incidentally, the fine Leledoth is not suitable lor velours embroidery. Lele takepride in producing cloth of a regular and fine weave, and they refuseinferior cloth it it is proffered for payment. A length at woven raffiais their normal standard of value lor counting debts and dues of all kinds. How little it has even now become a medium of exchange has been described elsewhere (Douglas 1958). Raffia cloth is notthe medium of exchange for the Bushong, who freely used cowries, copper units, and beads before they adopted Congolese francs asan additional currency. Raffia cloth is the principal export lorthe Lele, whereby they obtain knives, arrowheads and camwood. This mayexplain why unadorned raffia cloth holds a more important place in the admittedly simpler economy of the Lele than its equivalent in the diversified economy of the Bushong. ll weasknow why one tribe is rich and the other poor, the review oftechnology would seem to suggest that the Lele are poorer not only because their soil is less fertile, but because they work less at the production of goods. They do not build up producer's capital, such ~nets,canoes, traps and granaries. Nor do they work so long at cultlvatlon, and their houses wear out quicker. Their reduced effort is l~elfpart\y a consequence of their poorer environment. It is probable thattheir soil could not be worked by the intensive methods of Bushong agriculture without srartinz a degenerative cycle. Hunting ue~andpit-traps . .<> m . are less worthwhile an area poor In forest an d game ..But certain other features of their economy cannot be fully explained as adaptations to the environment. B WhenLele timetables of work are compared with those of the bushoug, we see no heavy schedules which suggest that there would ~I;nyshortage of labor. Yet, their economy is characterizedparadoxiy byan apparent shortaze of hands which confronts anyone who "e'S IIaborators. When 0' k co a sick man wants to send a message, or ~ec~s helpto clear his fields,or to repair his hut, or to draw palm wine Or11m, he will often be hard put to find anyone whose services he cancommand. "Kioa itangu bo-No time" is a common reply to requests f hI' . uncleared, ' . pa Iill trees run or e p. H,S fields may he or his t . St seedfo r Iac k of hands. This reflects the weakness 01s: the aut honty rUCture' m' In L ele society and does not imply that every a bl e- b a di ie d an IS fully ernp 1oyed from ' dawn to dusk. So th ImeanthropoloO'ists write as if the poorer the environment and eessffi' .-' ulat' e icienr the 0 techniques for explOitIng it, the more the pop' pro~on IS forced to work hard to maintain itself in existence; more Hctlvetechniques produce a surplus which enables a part of the
t:

224

Mary Douglas

population to be supported as a "leisure class.':' It is not necessam expose the fallacies of this approach, but It IS worth pomtmg ow that, poor as they are, the Lele are less fully employed than thl Bushong. They do less work, "Work,' of course, is here used in a narrow sense, relevant toa comparison of material wealth. Warfare, raiding, ambushing, all plannim of offensive and defensive actions, as also abductions, seductions, ao~ reclaimingofwomen, makingandrebutting of sorcery charges, negoo auons for fines and compensations and for credit-all these abson ingly interesting and doubtless satisfying activities of Lele soca life must, for this purpose 01 measuring comparative prosperity, bt counted as alternatives to productive work. Whether we call them forms of preferred idleness, or leisure activities, or "non-productiv work," no hidden judgment 01 value is implied. The distinction between productive work and other activities is merely used he" as rough index of material output . . If we wish to understand why the Lele work less, we need to coo Sider whether any social factors inhibit them from exploiting thell resources to the utmost. We should be prepated to find in a back1~a~ economy (no less than in our own economy) instances of decISION mA\,enced by short-term desires which, once taken, may block th'

realization of long-term interests. First, we must assess in a very general way, the attitudes shown b~
the Lele towards the inconveniences and rewards of work. For the Bushong, work is the means to wealth and wealth the n;:ans to status. They strongly emphasize the value of individual e art and achievement, and they are also prepared to collaborate In numbers Over a Sustained period when this. in necessary to raise out put. Nothing in Lele Culture corresponds to the Bushong striving for riches, The Bushong talk constantly and dream about wealth, wIule ~roverbs about it being the steppingstone to high status are oftenoo t ieir hI'S. Riches, prestige, and influence at court are expliwh aSSOCiated together (Vansina 1954). . yOn the other hand, Lele behave as if they expect tbe most sail' hlllgroies of middle and old age to fall into the individual's lap ,II

~o~~~~ness time, only provided that he is a real man-that ~~ child y vrn e. He will eventually marry several wives, beg. I ren, and so enter th B' . . I teTS \\'1 11 be ask d . . e egetter S cult. HIS infant daug 1 fr e III marnag b k 0 him Lar I hi e y SUitors bearing gifts and ready to WOl <t. I . er,wlen is culr b hi n i . .. eofra"

mem ers IpIsbnncrmgmarevenu

(6) For the most widel . . 0 "<) (part \'. The Economic SlY read statement of this VIew see HerskoV1CS 195~ ~1_...tI urp us) and [0 I" , see rlj!..l1959. r a 1St of repu ted subscribers to this VIeW.

8. Lele Economy Compared with the Bushong

I

225

cloth ITOlnfees of. new initiates, 'his newborn daughter's daughters can be promised in marriage to junior clansmen, who will strengthen his following in the village. His wives will look after him in his declining y,m. Hewill have stores of raffia cloths to lend or give, but he will I"~eslthisweal th because, in the natural course of events, he reached Ihe properstatus for his age. He would not be able to achieve this
ImllS

through wealth. Theemphasis on seniority means that, among the Lcle, work and coropetitiveness are not geared to their longings for prestige. Among the Bushong, largely through the mechanism of markets, Ihrough money, and through elective political office,the reverse is I uue, It also means that Lele society holds out its best rewards in middle life and after. Those who have reached this period oE privilegehavean interest in maintaining the status quo. Alloverthe world it is common for the privileged sections of a community to adopt protective policies, even againsttheir own more long.term interests. We find traces of this attitude among old Lele men.They tend to speak and behave as if they held, collectively, a poSilion tobe defended against the encroachments of the young men. I Examples oE this attitude have been published elsewhere (Douglas 1959). Briefly,secrets of ritual and healing are jealously guarded, and e;en knowledge of the debts and marriaae negotiations of their own ~ara aredeliberately withheld from the young men, as a technique :r retarding their adulthood. The old are realistic enough to know I attheyare dependent ultimately on the brawn and muscle of the I :~~~g men, and this thought is regularly brought up in di~,putes, they are pressmg defense of their privileges too far: What .W~p .we chased away the young men? Who wou ld h . pen to us, If eun,t With us, and carry home the game? Who would carry the Europth,"Sluggage?"The youncr men play on this, and threaten to leave e villacre no di 0 untr -1 eventually0 the dispute is settled- AI t h aug h i It d oes cu t rreetlyaffect the levels of production that we have been dist/~g: this atmosphere of jealousy between men's age-groups ceres:? Y IUhibits collaboration and should probably not be underImated in Its - 1ang-term effects. L I thee e also believe in restricting competition. At the beginning of centurytl Lle e chief - NgomaN vula trie ied to protect t h-e native teX'I' ,Ie tlelUd cloth (Sil ustry b y threatening death for anyone who wore European Wea upson 1911 : 310).lf a Lele man is asked why women do not ftMse w, he instantly . clOth replies: "If a woman could sewerh own the es,she might refuse to cook for the men. What could we give tUt~;~~~ad of clothes to keep them happy?" This gives a false pice male contribution to the domestic economy, but It IS
J O

226

Mary Douglas

reminiscent of some modern arguments sexes.

against "equal pay" for bow

Within the local section of a clan, restrictions on entry into th' the skilled professions are deliberately enforced, A young boy" not allowed to take up a craft practiced by a senior clansman, unls the latter agrees to retire. In the same clan, in the same village, tll"~ men rarely specialize in the same skilL If a man is a good drummn or carver, or smith, and he sees an aptitude for the same craft in h~ son or nephew, he may teach the boy all he knows and work with him until he thinks the apprenticeship complete, Then, ceremonially, he hands over his own position, with his tools, and retires in favoe ol the younger man, This ideal is frequently practiced, The accon panying convention, that a boy must not compete with his elde kinsman, is also strong enough to stop many a would-be specialin from developing his skill. Lele openly prefer reduced output. Their speclal/Stcraftsmen are few and far between because they are expected to make matters unpleasant for rivals competing for their husinea Consequently the Lele as a whole are poorer in metal or wooden o. jeers for their own use, or for export. Lastly, it seems that Lele old men have never been able to rely on their junior clansmen for regular assistance in the fields. As a junior ~vo~k-.mate,a son-in-law is more reliable than a fellow-clansman. I'his IS so for reasons connected with the pattern of residence and thr weakdefinItlOn of authority within the clan (Douglas 1957), An 1I~ married youth has no granary of his own to fill, Work which he doe to help hISmaternal uncles, [ather, or father's brothers, is counted '" Ius favor, but he can easily use the claims of one to refuse those 01 another, and escape with a minimum of toil. Boys would be boP' ntil u their middle thirties, They led the good life of weavillg, dnnkrng and f 11 ' I ' ' d farr, , ' . a owrng t Ie manly, sports of hunung an war without COntInuo . I The ' ,us agrrcu tura] responsibilities, . 1l1stltutlon 111 which the old men see their mterests ~d d'Ivorcedkey from til f h h 01 , ose ate young men is polygyny, Under t e system, smce tbe y ,I th' a f ' oung grr s were pre-empted by the older men, ge a mamage was elf ' 1 f r mea ' I' " ar y or gnls (eleven or twelve) and ate a (111 t ieir thIrties) It ld '. n'" , wou be sllperfical to suppose that these ana 0 ments were solei f h Oar should h y Or t e sexual gratification of the old men, .. see r emasp t f I d artlCli larty as one f I ar a t ie whole economic system, an P The di ,0 t ie parts which provide social security of the old, a ivrsion of lab b ld me with little they can d Or etween the sexes leaves the very 0 r kerJ' with many useful 0., An old Woman, by contrast, can earn he men

LOsecure necessa;ervlces: But old men use their rights over

y semces, both from women and from

\V~en,

8. Lele Economy Com-pored. with the Bushong

227

Through polygyny, the principles of male dominance and of seniority aremaintained to the end. To borrow an analogy from another sphere, wecould almost saythat the Lele have opted lor an ambitious Dld.age pensions scheme at the price of their general standards 01 living. We shall see that the whole community pays lor the security in oldagewhich polygyny represents. Inthe kingdom of ends peculiar to the Lele, various institutions seem to receive their justification because they are consistent with polygyny of the old men and delayed marriage of the young. The latter were reconciled to their bachelorhood, partly by the life of sport and ease, and partly by the institution of wife-sharing by age-sets. They wereencouraged to turn their attention away from the young wives in theirown villages by the related custom of abducting girls from rival villages(Douglas 1951). Intervillage feuding therefore appears 10 bean essential part of the total scheme, which furthermore commnsthe Lele to small-scale political life. The diversion of young men's energies to raiding and abducting from rival villages was a major canseof the low levels of production, for its effects were cumulative. The raiding gave rise to such insecurity that at some times half theable-bodied males were engaged in giving armed escort to theothers.Men said that in the old days a man did not go to the forest to draw palm wine alone, but his age-mate escorted him and stood w.ith his back to the tree, bowstring taut, watching for ambush. Commg from Bushong country in 1907, Torday was amazed at the fOrtified condition of Lele villages: "Here, too, we found enclosures, but instead of the leaf walls which are
~nsldered su~cient among the Bushongo, the separationswere palisades hTmed by solid stakes driven into the ground. Such a wall surrounded the w 01e VIill age, and the single entrance was so arranged that no more than

one person was able to enter at one time." (Torday 1925 : 231)
IT Simpson also remarked that Lele men, asked to carry his baggage comtheir own village to the next, armed as if going into strange Olin try Such . 1" . I to trade. W' InseCunty .., IS ObVIOUS Y rnnruca h bi e havestarted with polygyny as the primary value to which other

~llts havebeen adjusted because the Lele themselves talk as if all '\ atlons b ' . The . etween men are defined by rights to women. IV k poinr IS the more effective smce the Bushong are monogamous. e now weII t h at polygyny elsewhere does not give .' rtse to t hiIS pal "ricul araccu Iat i . pol mu auon of effects.Are there any features pecu I'rar to L e Ie by~~~.7 One is the proportion of polygynous old men, indicated hay Igh rate of bachelorhood. Another ISm the solutlOnS they eadoptdf ., '1 1 ext . e or the problems of late marriage. In some sooetles WIt enSlVe po 1ygyny, the msutunons . .. .' 1 . which exist for the sexua saus-

228

Mary Douglas

faction of the young men' are either wholly peaceful, or directedI' warfare with other tribes and not to hostilities between villaga Thirdly, where the chain of command is more sharply defined (~, patrilineal systems, or in matrilineal societies in which offices'" elective or carry recognizable political responsibilities, as among rue Bushong), then polygyny of older men is less likely to be accompanel by attitudes of suspicion and hostility between men's age-groups, Having started our analysis with polygyny and the high rate01 bachelorhood, tracing the various interactions, we find the Lele eeon amy constantly pegged down to the same level of production. Som, thing like a negative feedback appears in the relations of old to youn men: the more the old men reserve the girls for themselves, the mOi the young men are resentful and evasive; the more the young mID are refractory, the more the old men insist on their prerogative They ~ick on the most unsatisfactory of the young men, refuseI allot 111ma Wife, refuse him cult membership; the others note ho punishment, and either come to heel or move off to another villa~, There cannot be an indefinite worsening in their relations beca"", inevitably, the old men die, Then the young men inherit thl" Widows,and, now not so young, see themselves in sight of polygyno~ status, to be defended by solidarity of the old, , So we find the Lele, as a result of innumerable personal ChOIC about matters of Immediate concern committed to all the insecunl' of feuding villages, and to the frustrations of small-scale political lilt and ineffective economy,

If we prefer to start our analysis at the other end, not with polyg)~' but With scale of political organization we come to the same resul~ For whatever reason, the Bushong developed a well organized poI!' tical system (Vansina 1957), embracing 70,000 people. Autho."~ ISdecentrahzed fr h N' , , h"~ am t e ymu, or paramount chief to mmor c an d IT am these t h ' <Is Jnd" , I I '1' 0 canton eads, and from these to village hea ' Cia, egis auve and d " . d the;< hi" a mlD1stratlve powers are delegated own eanhneNs, WIth decisions eoneerninO' war and peace held at the cenl" by t e ! ymu Politi I ff ' electlve ". . APP~ , , " I tea a ce is or by appomtment. pnate POhClllg , 'the hierarchy L dPowers are attached to leaders at each pomt III 'I' , ea ers are h k d . . d ounei> whom tl c ec e by variously constitute c II ley must consult Th N' , " to que rebellions T .ib ,e! yuru mamtams Ius own army hi , 11 ute of gr , I ' ' broug into the ca itals am, s~ t, dried foods, and money lS ci~> The chief! p , and redIstrIbuted to loyal subjects and offi " Y COUrts pro 'd I ftsWen' wares so thar ' VI e we I-rewarded markets for era reglonal ' I" ' ourcv Even before th d specIa rues are salable far from their s k " (7) F e a vent of Europeans there was a food-mar et
or example. Tiv "sister_m "

arnage of the "manyatta" of the Masal.

"

~_st1

8. Lele Economy Com-pared

with the Bushong

229

Musenge, the Nvimi's capital. No doubt the Kasai River, protecting them from the long arm 01 the Bushong Empire, is partly responsible lorthe Lele's never having been drawn, willy-nilly, into its orbit, andaccepting its values. The Lele village, which is their largest autonomous unit, is not so higas the smallest political unit in the Bushong system. (The Lele villages average a population of 190, and the Bushong villages 210.)True, there are Lele chiefs, who claim relationship with Bushong chiefs, Each village is, indeed, found within a chiefdom-that is,anarea over which a member of the chiefly clan claims suzerainty. Butin practice his rights are found to be ritual and social. Each village is completely independent. The chief has no judicial or miliffiry authority. He claims tribute, but here we have no busy palace scene in which tribute payers flock in and are lavishly fed by the special catering system which chiefly polygyny so often represents. Whena chief visited a village, he was given raffia cloths, as many a~couldbe spared. Then the villagers asked what woman he would give them in return. He named one of his daughters, and they settled a day to fetch her. The girl became the communal wife of one of the age-sets: the whole village regarding itself as her legal husband and as sen-in-law to the chief. Son-in-lawship expressed their relation '0 himuntil the day that he claimed the girl's first daughter in marriage. Then the relation became reversed, the chief being son-in-law thevillage, The raffia gifts and women which went back and forth betweenthe chief and village were not essentially different from those which linked independent villages to one another in peaceful exchange. None of this interfered with the autonomy of the village. . , Th e sImple factor of scale alone has various repercussions. There ~noladder of status up which a man may honorably climb to satisfy IS competitive ambitions. There is no series of offices for which age andexperience qualify a man, so that in his physical decline he can enJoy respect and influence and material rewards. The Bushong lay feat emphasis on individual effort and achievement, but the Lele t~ to damp it down. They avoid overt roles of leadership and fear , e Jealousy which individual success arouses. Their truncated status 'I ~stemturns the Le1e village in on itself, to brood on quarrels and p:~~ry aCcusations, or turns it, in hostility, against other villages, so im otmg the general feeling of insecurity. The latter makes markers n POd $SIble, and renders pointless ambition to produce above home e'sTh ' di .' eo, Id' m such an economy unable to save, or to acqune gnny . declining years by occupymg ' . hi I po Iiti hoi . in t1 . rerr Igl mea \ affice, Ster thei r posinon ' . . mz ' . bl e women, and b"ld' by claim the marnagea u mg up a system of rewards e ' reserved for those w ha begat in

'0

230

M aTy Douglas

wedlock. And so we are back again to polygyny and prolonged ooc1t lorhood, This picture has been partly based on deductions about whatl< societymust have been like twenty years belore fieldwork was begu Before 1930 they could still resort to ordeals, enslave, raid and com terraid, abduct women, and pursue blood-vengeance with barlt arrows. They still needed to fortify their villages against attacksI 1949 the scene had changed.The young men had broken out oft~t restaining social environment-by becoming Christians. Thcy cnj protection, from missionand government, from reprisals by paga" They could marry young Christian girls who, similarly, were abltt escapetheir expected lot as junior wives of elderly polygynists. illi. ing was ended, age-setswere nearly finished. Old men had le~," thority even than before. The young Christian tended to seek e ployment with Europeans to escape the reproaches and susptCI," which their abstention from pagan rituals engendered." . It would be interesting to compare their performance as workro m the new and freer COntext. One might expect that, away from~ influence of their old culture, Lele performance might equal orsill passthat of Bushong. Unfortunately the framework for such a cou> panson IS lackrng. Neither tribe has a high reputation for rodUlt. With Its respecnve employers, compared with immigrant Cok .. Luba and Pende workers.This may simply be because the best rep" tatrons are earned by tribes which have longest been accustomedt' wage-labor.

One is tempted to predict that, in so far as it is due to social facto." Lele are likely to change their name for idleness and lack of stamt" before long. In 1949-50 they Were not forthcoming in numbersl~ plantation labor or forcutting oil-palm nuts. By 1954, when ascall~ mg of small shops through the territory had put trade goods with their reach, they had become eager to earn money. The restrict"t mfluence of the Id . I a SOCIa system was already weaker. ish Wemay now look again at the demoQ1-aphic factor and distingu, someeffects on' f I e ' I IS uv . ,It a t ie economy and the political syste(tl. t . viousthat in different typesof economy the active male contribUIlO l lave drfferent time spans accordi~g to the nature of the war,

;~ar

t.lerelwere .a modern community

whose bread-winners
I

were
.

~er
~

skatmg champions, footballers or miners at the coa~'''~ tnlatlOna lelrpenod f . I a acnv- work would be briefer than in economIes de" on, ess phYSIcally exacting tasks. A primitive economy is, by d', nUlon, one based . e ruI merna- tl on a rudimentary technology, and the mor sioi y, re more the work consists of purely individual phY
(8) Thls process has b '. een descrIbed 10 Douglas
1959 b.

8. Lele Economy Compared with the Bushong

231

e~ort. Moreover, the simpler the economy, the smaller the scope for managerial roles and ancillary sedentary work. The result, then, is that theperiod of full, active contribution to the economy is shorter.' If we compare Lele and Bushong economies on these lines, we see thatthe "age of retirement" is likely to be earlier for the Lele. The typi. calBushongman is able, long after he has passed his physical prime, to makea useful contribution to production, either by using his experience to direct the collaboration of others or in various administrative roles which are important in maintaining the security and order necessary for prosperity. The Lele economy, on the other hand,
80

80 70 60

70 60 50 40 lELE 30 20 10
9
from War/<

50 LELE
BUSHONG

40 30 20 10

BUSHONG

FIGURE

FIGURE

10

Ag~olR ctiremen: .

Period

Age of Entry into FullAgricultural Responsibility of Full Work, Showing

IVithitse ... . . h t to expenence . and mp hasi asis on individual work, gIves less weig findsless productive work for the older man to do. We can only gu~sat the differences but it is worth presenting the idea visually, as In Figure 9. ' inFUrthennore, at the other end of the life span, the same trend is m creasedbecause of the late entry into agricultural work of Lele en The young Lele is not fully employed in . agncu . 1ture unu '1 h e ~'\ ~\ east thir.ty and married, the Bushong man when he is twenty. Lei gure 10 illustrates the idea that the active labor force III the . on both 8<:0 e econo my, as a proportion of the total popu I' anon, IS ec:" smaUer than it is with the Bushong. The total output of the has to be shared among a larger population of dependants. , ompanson of the two economies has shown up somethmg I) This ap proach was suggested by Linton 1940.

1'~:~

<

232

Mary Douglas

like the effects of "backwash" described by Professor Myrdal (lgS)I First we see that in the environment there are initial disadvanta'" which limit development. Secondly, we find that in the social orga~i.

fishlnl.

bulldln'l.

rv

ECONOMY
in

SOCIAL ORGANIS~lIlli

~rgdum'5 equipment, sheller, tools, Sloral8lccd.,

LII~ In'lllmenl

Wnk

,ulhllilj,IJUtliJ!!

Ito lilednpltil

assets.

I
Importance ~lllnilrill

Shorlall 01 hands ler work 01111 kInds. Lillie sustained coapllllj~n. acanomlc

I'

Snual division or I.b~r:

lIIom'n dOlill,ul1urllnd lIIoroM's .kliled trlllsnG!

dev,lop.d

Rllirictions en oulput and on enlfY te skilled pr.fes51~n5.

No money. No mlr~ell Dlllrlbullcn a~c~r~lnllc

lhe ol.lm! 01 stllUI.

-- -. Batk~ash.' ettects makini cumulnthe contribution to low oulpu\.

--

FIGURE

11

Lele Economy and S

ociai Organiz.ation

zatton Itself there are further inhi h] . lati,e and which work 0 !tIng effects which are [ll1J1V ona eJll technology and pone Ion.another and back aeain on the eC ta<e: . pu anon t' . 0 lI " We Iiave tned to pr ' . 0 IntenSIfy the initial dis"dva o~. plified form in Figu:S:~Lthe mteraction of these tendencies ill a 51

8. Lele Ec~nomy Compared with the Bushong

233

"Nothing succeeds like success." Somehow, sometime, the Busbonz look decisions which produced a favorable turn in their fortunes and <I off interactions which resulted in their political hegemony and their wealth. The Lele missed the benefits of this civilization because 01 their locationon the other side of the Kasai River, their poorer .ils, theirhistory. The decisions they took amounted to an accommodation of their life to a lower political and economic level. Their l.hnolagy wasinferior, so their efforts were backed with less efficient ~uipment, and their economy was less productive. Their old social ~llem harredmany of the chances which might have favored economicgrowth. Anthropologists sometimes tend to discuss the adoption or rejecuonafnewtechniques in terms of a cultural mystique, as if dealing ,Ilh irreducibleprinciples, of which no analysis is feasible."? The Ldemay betaken as a case in point. Their preference [or their own mleriar techniques, in spite of awareness of better methods. used acrossthe river,depend on certain institutions, and these again on their history and environment. Through economic analysis we can break dawnthe effect of choices, each made reasonably enough in its , O\l~ restricted context. By following up the interactions of these chOices, oneupon another, we can see how the hIghly IdIOsyncratIc mold olLeleculture is related to a certain low level of productIon.

r~ SeeBenedict (1956
devi

: 187):

"Among

primitive

peoples,

this lack of interest

in

~togress' has been proverbial Illlnts which ensure its survival

Every primitive tribe has i.ts own cU~Lllral arran.gc. They may be culturally umnterested 10 Iabor-savmg

res.Oftenthe value they put on time is extremely ~llufd than efficiency. Our cultural system and theirs

d' . d " far more low, an wis oro is . are oriented around different

iiolk"

L__