Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-14T06:10:00.467Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Female over male or left over right: solving a classificatory puzzle among the OvaHimba

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 December 2011

David P. Crandall
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This article puts forward a resolution to a curious circumstance, namely, why the left, and not the right, appears to be pre-eminent among the Himba. Himba arrange gendered, domestic and ritual space, their own bodies in ritual contexts and, to an extent, time strongly in favour of the left. The fact that in their language ‘left’ connotes weakness while ‘right’ connotes strength adds to the puzzle. It is argued that, to understand this apparent contradiction of the near-universal classificatory ascendancy of right over left, one must assess the Himba dual symbolic system while drawing upon the principle of symbolic parallax which allows a single referent, in this case the sacred ancestral fire, to be viewed from differing spatial perspectives. By following this procedure the puzzle is resolved, as the human direction from which the primary referent is viewed is merely the mirror image of a transcendant view.

Résumé

Cet article présente une résolution à une situation curieuse, à savoir pourquoi la gauche, et non pas la droite, semble être prééminente parmi les Himba. Les Himba arrangent les espaces divisés selon les sexes, les espaces rituels et domestiques, et leurs corps lors des rituels, et jusqu'à un certain point le temps fortement en faveur de la gauche. Le fait que dans leur langue ‘la gauche’ dénote de la faiblesse tandis que ‘la droite’ dénote de la force augmente le mystère. On affirme que pour comprendre ce qui apparaît être une contradiction de la classification presque universelle de la droite ayant dominance sur la gauche, on doit évaluer le système dualistique symbolique des Himba tout en faisant appel au principe du parallax symbolique qui permet à un seul élément, dans ce cas le feu ancestral sacré, d'être vu selon des perspectives spatiales différentes. En suivant cette procédure le mystère est résolu, comme la direction depuis laquelle l'élément principal est vu est simplement l'image invertie d'une vue transcendante.

Type
Taking the spirits' perspective
Information
Africa , Volume 66 , Issue 3 , July 1996 , pp. 327 - 348
Copyright
Copyright © International African Institute 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Beidelman, T. O. 1973. ‘Kaguru symbolic classification’, in Needham, R. (ed.), Right and Left. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Crandall, D. P. 1991a. ‘The strength of the OvaHimba patrilineage’, Cimbebasia 13, 45–53.Google Scholar
Crandall, D. P. 1991b. ‘The importance of maize among the OvaHimba’, Journal of the Namibian Scientific Society 43, 7–18.Google Scholar
Diamond, S. 1974. ‘The myth of structuralism’, in Rossi, I. (ed.), The Unconscious in Culture. New York: Dutton.Google Scholar
Douglas, M. 1967. ‘The meaning of myth’, in Leach, E. (ed.) The Structural Study of Myth and Totemism. London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
Estermann, C. 1981. The Ethnography of Southwestern Angola III. New York: Africana.Google Scholar
Gibson, G. 1956. ‘Double descent and its correlates among the Herero of Ngamiland’, American Anthropologist 58, 109–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goody, J. 1977. The Domestication of the Savage Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Granet, M. 1933. ‘Right and left in China’, reprinted 1973 in Needham, R. (ed.), Right and Left. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hallpike, C. R. 1979. The Foundations of Primitive Thought. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Herz, R. 1909. ‘The pre-eminence of the right hand: a study in religious polarity’, reprinted 1960 in Death and the Right Hand, London: Cohen & West.Google Scholar
Irle, J. 1906. Die Herero. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann.Google Scholar
Jacobsohn, M. 1988. ‘Preliminary notes on the symbolic role of space and material culture among semi-nomadic Himba and Herero herders in western Kaokoland’, Cimbebasia 10, 75–99.Google Scholar
Jacobsohn, M. 1990. The Ovahimba: nomads of Namibia. London: New Holland.Google Scholar
Keesing, R. 1975. Kin Groups and Social Structure. New York: Holt Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Kenyatta, J. 1938. Facing Mount Kenya: the tribal life of the Kikuyu. London: Seeker & Warburg.Google Scholar
Kopytoff, I. 1971. ‘Ancestors as elders in Africa’, Africa 41 (2), 129–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuper, A. 1980. ‘Symbolic dimensions of the southern Bantu homestead’, Africa 50 (1), 8–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuvare, S. 1977. ‘Die Kaokeveld Herero’, in Sundermeier, T. (ed.), Die Mbanderu. Collectanea Instituti Anthropos 14, St Augustin: Richarz.Google Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, C. 1963. Structural Anthropology. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, C. 1974. Tristes tropiques. New York: Atheneum.Google Scholar
Luttig, H. G. 1933. The Religious System and Social Organisation of the Herero. Utrecht: Kermink.Google Scholar
Malan, J. S. 1973. ‘Double descent among the Himba of South West Africa’, Cimbebasia (B) 2, 81–112.Google Scholar
Mayberry-Lewis, D. 1969. Review of Mythologiques: du miel aux cendres, American Anthropologist 71, 114–21.Google Scholar
Mayberry-Lewis, D. 1989. ‘The quest for harmony’, in Mayberry-Lewis, D. and Almagor, U. (eds.), The Attraction of Opposites. Ann Arbor, Mi.: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Needham, R. 1960. ‘The left hand of the Mugwe’, Africa 30 (1), 20–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Needham, R. 1967. ‘Right and left in Nyoro symbolic classification’, Africa 37 (4), 425–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Needham, R. 1973a. ‘Introduction’, in Needham, R. (ed.), Right and Left. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Needham, R. (ed.), 1973b. Right and Left: essays on dual symbolic classification. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Needham, R. 1987. Counterpoints. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Sundermeier, T. (ed.) 1977. Die Mbanderu. St Augustin: Anthropos-Institut.Google Scholar
Vedder, H. 1928. ‘The Herero’, in Hahan, C. (ed.) Native Tribes of South West Africa. Cape Town: Cape Times Ltd.Google Scholar
Vedder, H. 1938. South West Africa in Early Times. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Werner, A. 1904. ‘Note on the terms used for right hand and left hand in the Bantu languages’, Journal of the African Society 13, 112–16.Google Scholar
Wieschhoff, H. A. 1938. ‘Concepts of right and left in African cultures’, Journal of the American Oriental Society 58, 202–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar