Victor Turner

Social Dramas and Stories about Them

Analyse de la structure sociale des Ndembu du nord-ouest de la Zambie et de la facon dont cette structure abstraite determine le type de relations concretes que nouent les individus et les conflits qui les opposent. La structure sociale Ndembu se caracterise par une opposition constante entre ligne paternelle et ligne maternelle, une residence virilocale inversee par les divorces frequents qui ramenent chez leurs peres les epouses et leurs enfants.

Symbols in Ndembu Ritual

Among the Ndembu of Northern Rhodesia, the importance of ritual in the lives of villagers is striking. Hardly a week passes, in a small neighbourhood, without a ritual drum being heard in one or other of its villages.

The Spatial Separation of Generations in Ndembu Village Structure

In recent literature on the social structure of African peoples much attention has been paid to the role of the lineage in village and local organization. Among one Central African people at least--the Mwinilunga Ndembu of Northern Rhodesia--the spatial separation of adjacent genealogical generations is a structural principle of equal importance. Other anthropologists working in Angola and western and central Northern Rhodesia have obtained data which suggest that this principle is widespread in Central Africa. The Ndembu of today are the descendants of a group of Lunda who left their homeland of Luunda in the southern Congo and conquered the indigenous Mbwela people who lived around the sources of the Zambezi and Lizabu rivers. These conquerors constituted one of a number of offshoots from the great Central African empire of Mwantiyanvwa or Mwata Yavo and appear to have arrived at their present territory about two centuries ago. Much intermarriage between Lunda and Mbwela seems to have taken place since the conquest although there are a number of villages which are said to consist of matrilineal descendants of the autochthonous population. Such villages however exhibit no significant structural differences from those of reputed Lunda origin. (excerpt)

Liminalität und Communitas

In diesem Kapitel greife ich ein Thema auf, das ich bereits an anderer Stelle (Turner 1967, 93–111) kurz behandelt habe, gehe auf einige Variationen dieses Themas ein und mache mir Gedanken daruber, welche Implikationen es fur die Erforschung von Kultur und Gesellschaft hat. Fur dieses Thema ist vor allem bedeutsam, was Arnold van Gennep (1909) als „Schwellenphase“ der rites de passage (Ubergangsriten) bezeichnet hat. Van Gennep selbst definierte Ubergangsriten als „Riten, die einen Orts-, Zustands-, Positions- oder Altersgruppenwechsel begleiten“. Um den Unterschied zwischen „Zustand“ und „Ubergang“ deutlich zu machen, schliesst meine Verwendung des Begriffs „Zustand“ alle von van Gennep gebrauchten Begriffe ein. „Zustand“ ist ein umfassenderer Begriff als „Status“ oder „Amt“ und bezeichnet jeden kulturell definierten, stabilen oder wiederkehrenden Zustand. Van Gennep hat gezeigt, dass alle Ubergangsriten drei Phasen aufweisen: die Trennungs-, die Schwellen- und die Angliederungsphase. In der ersten Phase (der Trennung) verweist symbolisches Verhalten auf die Loslosung eines Einzelnen oder einer Gruppe von einem fruheren fixierten Punkt der Sozialstruktur, von einer Reihe kultureller Bedingungen (einem „Zustand“) oder von beidem gleichzeitig. In der mittleren „Schwellenphase“ ist das rituelle Subjekt (der „Passierende“) von Ambiguitat gekennzeichnet; es durchschreitet einen kulturellen Bereich, der wenig oder keine Merkmale des vergangenen oder kunftigen Zustands aufweist. In der dritten Phase (der Angliederung oder Wiedereingliederung) ist der Ubergang vollzogen. Das rituelle Subjekt — ob Individuum oder Kollektiv — befindet sich wieder in einem relativ stabilen Zustand und hat demzufolge anderen gegenuber klar definierte, sozial-strukturbedingte Rechte und Pflichten. Man erwartet von ihm, dass es sein Verhalten an traditionellen Normen und ethischen Massstaben ausrichtet, die alle Inhaber sozialer Positionen in ein System solcher Positionen einbindet.

The syntax of symbolism in an African religion

My investigations into the symbolism of African religion, published in several monographs and papers, allow me to draw the following tentative conclusions: (1) Symbols, which may be described as the molecules of ritual, have great semantic richness and depth and possess a specific structure. (2) Symbols have three major dimensions of significance— (a) the exegetic, (b) the operational, and (c) the positional. (3) The exegetic dimension consists of the w hole corpus of explanations of a particular symbol’s meaning offered by indigenous informants— the informants must of course be classified according to their social characteristics (age, sex, status, religious role, degree of esoteric knowledge, etc.). (4) In The operational dimension a symbol’s meaning is equated with its use— here we observe what the ritual participants do with it and not only what they say about it. Here, too, we consider not only the symbol but also the structure and composition of the group which handles it or performs mimetic acts with direct reference to it. We further note the affective qualities of these acts, whether they are aggressive, sad, joyful, penitent, derisive, and so forth, in terms of the culture’s interpretations of these expressive acts. We also inquire why certain persons and groups are absent on given ritual occasions, and whether this absence represents deliberate exclusion. (5) In the positional dimension we see the meaning of a symbol as deriving from its relationship to other symbols in a specific cluster or gestalt of symbols whose elements acquire much of their significance from their position in its structure ; (6) In the exegetic dimension the meaning of a symbol is built up by analogy and association on three semantic foundations, which we may call its (a) nominal, (b) substantial, and (c) artifactual semantic bases. (7) The nominal basis consists in the name assigned to the symbol in ritual contexts, in non-ritual contexts, or in both sets of contexts. (8) The substantial basis, in the case of objects used as symbols, consists in their culturally selected natural and material properties. (9) The artifactual basis is represented by the symbolic object after it has been worked upon, fashioned or treated by purposive human activity; in short, when it becomes a cultural artifact.