User:Physis/Diachronical description of Hadzabe beliefs


 * The verbatim and verbatim translated citations are that much incomplete yet, that sometimes their most essential part is lacking, in this case they may be left simply out.

Dear Kwamikagami,

Thank You very much for Your quick answer and the many information You provided, including extremely valuable ones for me, e.g. concrete details about why Haine can be regarded as having lunar connotations (I have long been wondering about that). Thank You also writing about the details of the origin and procession of Kohl-Larsen's records.

Sorry for my questions below. I can imagine that You are right in all aspects, but in any case such questions must be resolved, or at least thought over for a likely hint for resolution. because the same / similar questions can be raised also by the readers of the article. We cannot simply conceal Ischoko's role permeating half of the origin myths, possibly deeply integrated in the Hadzabe folklore of the 1930s (I admit Kohl-Larsen's resorting to informants may challenge this). Single, isolated sentences are prone to mistranslation/misinterpretation, but meanings deeply integrated in the very threads and logic of the myts are less prone to translation errors. I admit, also such misinterpretations are possible, but we must at least mention them or try to explain/resolve such questions to the reader.

In order to summary almost everything in a single case study, I shall describe also the Tsikayo-controversies.

Ishoko, Haine, Seta, Mambedaka. Epeme and Moon.
I have just found another discussion. It seems to support profoundly and decidingly Your approach in several aspects, because it mentions new mythological figures of whom I have never heard. I have to read it through yet.

Seta's figure may be mentioned also in one of Kohl-Larsen's record, because "Сэта" is cited in Berezkins' online motif catalog, also here with lunar connotation. Somewhere I read that another celestial connotation is attributed to Seta: namely Pleiades, although the linguistical considerations semm for me to support the lunar version, because (lexically feminine) means “sun”, and  (lexically masculine) means “moon”.

There is mention also about a benevolent woman mythological figure, who has given the Epembe dance to people. Another sources reveals more about her: Mambedaka. Also hhe customs, prescriptions and taboos about moon and its phases are detailed, just like the connection with epeme.

Excerpts can be listened streamed online. Several titles refer to the importance of moon phases. Even more interesting is the "grandfother's flesh" title. Does it refer to the hyenas consuming Haine, as recorded by Kohl-Larsen in the "Tsikayo" myth?

For Mambedaka, the same questions arise as for Tsikayo:
 * Her name does not end with “-ko”. I admit, this woman had rather strange masculine behavior: she “dressed as a man, hunted male zebra, and wore the penis of her kills, using this to have sex with her ‘wives’". This saves my trust in the gender marking consequentness of Hadza language, but on the other hand, together with the myth about ancient woman dominance over men, it seems to support Kohl-Larsen's suspicion of blurred/mixed gender occurrences in mythology.
 * What does her name mean? Is it of celestial, zoomorphical etc. connotation?

To increase the plethora of epeme-contexts, Kohl-Larsen has record also bout a horrifying punitive figure Mgungu, who is alternatively called Epembe, and has to do with th meat-consuming habit of men and women, the two genders separated. Also a benvolent, mighty woman occurs in the story's end, it is Haine. Details in section.

Lexical gender and its semantic: either unspecified or identic
Is it possible that Ishoko (not as lexeme but as the mythological figure) is of neutral or unspecified connotation,rather than explicitly female? Lexical gender and semantical sexual connotation is related but not identical. Words having lexically masculine gender have may have both male or neutral (unspecified) semantics, words having lexically feminine gender may have both have female or neutral (unspecified) semantics. The word for sun has feminine lexical gender, thus it may have also neutral (unspecified) semantics.

Women without -ko?
Tsikayo and Mambedaka: in their case, not only single sentences claim that they be women, their role taking is integrated deeply in th very thread and logic of their stories. I admit Mambadeka's strange role-taking is extraodrinal, I admit she deserves masculine labeling, but Tsikayo seems to be a rather conventional woman. I write the details in their respective sections.

Tsikayo-controversies
I also confess that my argument ("there are meanings which are so deeply integrated and embedded in the very logic of the myths' thread that they are not prone to misinterpretation") may be severely undermined by a controversy of the Tsikayo-myth. Here Haine calls Schaschaya with Tsikayo's name! This may prove that the questions may run much deeper than the possible mistranslation of a few isolated expressions. Thus, this may prove Your approach greatly.

The Tsikayo-myth may contain also another interesting controversy: Tsikayo is evidently female (besides declared so definitely, her whole behavior and role-taking suggests that), but her name does not end with “-ko”.

Can You hep me in resolving the Tsikayo-controversies? I saw You have deep knowledge also in the names. What do names "Tsikayo" and "Schaschaya" mean? The myth reveals only that both figures "fly into the sky" eventually (thus they may be of celestial connotation). and a Russian source claims that Schaschaya becomes the Morning Star.

Kohl-Larsen and Berger
Although I have not heard directly about the linguistical/translation problems, but I was long thinking about an endnote in Kohl-Larsen's book: in this endnote, he confesses that he had to consult Berger in linguistical questions. Kohl-Larsen even mentions that it was Berger who explained that "-ko" and "-ye" are grammatical suffixes (while "ischo-" refers to the sun). Also other Kohl-Larsen-endnotes suggest that Kohl-Larsen worked with informant(s), we must take that in consideration. It would have been better if he had done a more direct method, an in-depth fieldwork, a modern "participant observation": mastering Hadza language, partaking in their everyday life almost as a family member for years. But we can be also glad that he worked in the 1930s, thus he could have the chance to commemorate more intact, less contaminated materials.

Lack of chiefs
I agree Your remark about the lack of ciefs, the mentions of "chiefs" (Indaya, Haine, even Kohl-Larsen's informant Schungwitscha is termed as "chief of the Tindiga") disturbed also me. Even the German video declares definitely "Sie haben weder Häuptlinge noch Schamane" (They have neither chiefs nor shamans). Your argument is correct, hunter-gatherers tend not to have chiefs, emergence of chiefs seems to be triggered by sedentary lifestyle (some fishing communities), storage of goods (Eskimos) etc. I thought first that Kohl-Larsen means a kind of "big man" role, but also "big man" needs some kind of agriculture, although only a preliminary one (example of Marind-anim).

Doom of medicine men, seers?
Kohl-Larsen also records myths about seers, medicine-men-like figures, and they are mentioned also in other myths: liberation from !chk!ee, suspicion against Manjá, regarded as an evil sorcerer. Although the video declares that there are no shamans, but maybe it is a result of decline. For comparison, Bushmen do have features that can be linked to shamanism (motif of soul travel),  (sometimes debated ) thus I assume that Kohl-Larsen may be right here.

Grammatical
Thank You for Your complete explanation why huge mistranslations can occur in the gender of personal pronouns etc, making several of my argumentations about genders invalid.

Tsikayo
Despite of that, Tsikayo seems for me to raise a question.

Is gender marked entirely consequently throughout all myths? You have discussed this question thoroughly, but now suddenly Tsikayo came to my mind. She is probably female, even if the story has been severely mistranslated. Tsikayo's female role permeates the story. She becomes pregnant, the child is inside her belly, the child calls her "mother". A man harvests the money instead of Tsikayo, arguing that "I am a man, I harvest the honey", Tsikayo accompanies the man till the man's home, the child says her mother: "you have just received a husband". Despite of Tsikayo's evidently female role, her name does not end with "-ko".

Thank You for that You explained that some of the characters are animal names. I knew that Utsameya was a hyena, Tschakoo was a snake and Dighriako was a honeyguide, but I did not know that Tsogwana was a giraffe. Now I suppose that Tsikayo's name is also something celestial or zoomorphic thing, and that's why her name does not end with "-ko". But then the same explanation may work also for Haine! If Tsikayo can manage to be a woman without letting her name end with "-ko", maybe then also Haine can succeed in the same achievement, too!

I admit that the story has some strange features.
 * Haine calls his grandson Scahschaya on Tsikayo's name. This mixing of names is strange, thus I can imagine that there is a mistranslation big enough to undermine my argumentation above completely.
 * Haine hears the smell of he earth. Is this a synesthesia or a minstranslation? It is not explaned, neither commented. It occurs in two sentences (one from the narrator, the other given into Tsikayo's mounth).

Now let us see my translation of the Tsikayo-myth I promised! As I said I admit that there are evident mistranslation (assumption of "chief" among Hadyabe). I admit also that there is a confusing thing in the story: Haine calls “Tsikayo”, but it is the grandson Schaschaya who is expected to reply. Tsikayo

In old times, as people — all tribes — habe been created, Indaya, the main chief said to them, he spoke to all tribes: “You people, you must take care very much, because very many people will come! If you do not keep your eyes open and you don't use your intellect, then you all will perish! The people who will come are called Watatoibi. When you see them coming, flee! Their weapons are large shields, their face and figure resembles to those of the black people, they wear furs as clothes!”

In the times when Indaya spoke that, he spoke to us: “You have no weapons for going aganst these people — I shall make you weapons!”

Indaya prepared a bow with a string, then he produced arrows. As he was ready woth the bow, he told to them: “I shall show you how valuable this item is!”

Indaya took the bow — thre was a tree nearby — and he shot an arrow onto the tree. That kept stuck in the tree. Indaya said to them: “Have you seen it?”

"Yes!" — they replied.

Indaya continued: “You must shoot right this way, when the alien people, the Watatoibi will come, then they will not conquere you!”

But this Indaya was not the greatest, a greater chief was Haine. Haine lived over there at the mountain at the mountain called Ngasingwasika, in the south. Haine was very great, he was mighty among all animals, he was great also among people. He bore a child. As he had born this child, he adjourned across the whole landscape. Haine's s cild was a girl, she was called Tsikayo. Tsikayo became pregnant.

Once, Haine left and sought for elephants. He found an elephant, took it and bound it onto his hip, without having disintegrated. Then haine killed two rhinoceroses. He bound a rhinoceros onto his leg, he bound the second one to his other leg. He took a further elephant onto his shoulder. There were two elephant, there were three elephants: he carried one elephant on his one side, he carried another one on his other side, he carried the third one on his shoulders.

As Haine was preparing to return home, he began already to call the name of his child: “Tsikayo!”

His child, who was pregnant, told to her embryo in her belly: “Your grandfather is calling you!”

But the child was unwilling to reply. It said: “The old one is very far away yet!” Haine was as far away as the distance between your camp and Sirwa (which we call Irumalo).

Now Tsikayo heard a great earthquake. The whole earth quaked — it was Haine's steps. Haine called now again: “Tsikayo!”.

The child in the body of the mother said: “The grandfather is far awat yet,I shall not answer till he is not here!”

In old times the sun ran around just like people run. Haine was the moon, Tsikayo was his child.

As Haine came near to his home, as he was as near as the distance from here to the tree, the mother saidto the child: “Now answer to your gandfather, he is very near to us!”

But the child was unwilling,, he said: “No, I shall not reply before he comes here!”

Their home was on a high, long, long mountatin. There was a cave in this mountain.They lived in itm Haine and Tsikayo. As Haine arrived into the home, he asked: “I have been calling your name for long, but you, my grandson, do not reply me?”

The daughter, Tsikayo, replied: ”I have told him as well to reply, but he said again and again: «My grandfather is not here yet!»” Tsikayo continued: tell me what you say for that!

Haine told her: “Make fire!”

She made fire. As she was ready with that, the old man threw all game into the fire. As had done so, Tsikayo bore a child. His name was Schaschaya. Schaschaya is the Morning Star, who precedes always the sun.

As the daughter had born the boy Schaschaya, the old man began to poke around the earth with his spear. He said: “I hear alien smell! Who was here?”

The daughter replied: “There was nobody other here, maybe the child has played with the earth, and you hear the smell of the earth.”

Now the old man left, he went to Umbugwe, inorder to fetch meat again. He killed elephants and rhinoceroses again. As he came back again, he passed through Mbulu Mountain.

He was not at home, as a bird came to the home. It was a Digerigo bird, the honey guide.

Lexical level
You explained correctly how mistranslations can occure in expresions like "bear a child" "Wife of" etc. I do not have questions here, I understand that completely:

Because of the possible problems in multiple translation and linguistical matters, I admit now that my arguments about the lexical content of the myths are also refutable. Thus, althogh the ambiguity of genders of Ischoko and Haine seems to be supported also by the mere lexical content of the stories themselves, but they can indeed easily be mistranslations ("fathered a child" -> "bears a child"). Thank You for pointing out that. They suggested for me a considerable lexical hint, supporting the claim that the ambiguity of genders is/was indeed part of Hadzabe beliefs.
 * Haine, wife of Ischoko,
 * Haine said to Ischoko: "you, my husband",
 * Haine … a man … gave birth to a child … became a father … a grandfather

The story You cited, in which Haine gives people knees, is present also in Kohl-Larsen's book. But in the beginning of this story, it is Ischoko who initiates the whole idea. Ischoko gives fire tools and the ability to sit to people via Haine. I admit that this is reflected in a single sentence + the title, thus it can be also subject to mistranslation.

Mgungu (Epembe)
There is still a single case where I find the assumption of mistranslation unlikely.In the story of Mgungu. Mgungu punishes people extremely, if they do not obey a taboo: Mgungu expects every camp to organize the eating separated for men and women. Mgungu seems to punish even bona fide people horribly, either with death or with beating and destroying all goods. At last the people are saved by Haine, “their great mother”: she drives Mgungu away. The story reveals also that the taboo had originaly been ordered by Indaya, then by Dendai. Except for that, there is no mention of any authorization: nobody sent Mgungu, Both DendaiMgungu acted entirely by himself. There is no mention of atrocity about Indaya or Dendai.

Haine occurs only at the very end of the story, her identity as "old mother" occurs in a single sentence, thus, all this is prone to mistranslation. But not so much as the former examples of Yours. Mother is a very basic word (unlike "… bears child, named …" vs "… fathers …"). The word is not used in a fragrant syntactical contexts ("…, wife of …" vs "…'s wife …"). No other character features in the story who could be imagined as great mother. Thus it is not simple to imagine how it could be mistranslated.

An interesting thing: Mgungu is also called Epembe, thus it makes the various menaings of epeme even more colorful.

Narrative level: integrated meanings
But, even if we accept that the records may have become corrupted in grammatical matters, and the lexical hints are distorted in chain translations, there is also a third level of the stories. The narrative level, the thread of the story.

Now I can imaine that You are rigt in all aspects, and the sentences I cited from the myths are very prone to mistranslation. Expressions like "Haine, Ischoko's wife", "Haine bears child" are single, isolated occurrences, any translation error can result them as the right converse of the otiginal menaing.

But there are thing which are not only conveyed by single isolated occurrences, but they permeate whole stories, even whole families of stories: they are integrated in the very logic and thread of the stories.
 * Tsikayo's gender (and the role she takes on) is embedded in her whole story,
 * and Ischoko's axial relevance (origin myths, magical formulae, fate of individual) permeates a whole bunch of myths. Sometimes Haine is not even mentioned.

It would take a huge fake to mistranslate Ischoko's overall axial relevance and Tsikayo's gender and role. It cannot be a matter of translation error in single isolated expressions. To corrupt such deeply integrated meaning, it takes to mistranslate (restructure) the whole structure of the story from scratch.

I admit, such a severe corruption of integrated meaning is not entirely impossible: also the Bushman folklore texts seem for me to be almost incomprehensible, allowing very different interpretations

Ischoko in axial relevance, often alone (without any mentioning of Haine)
There are also stories in which Ischoko's axial relevance permeates the whole story, moreover, Ischoko often features alone. Thus the vulnerability to mistranslation seems to be improbable. Ischoko's axial role seems to be abundant in the myths, moreover, it permeates lot of them: it is embedded into their very threads and logic. I add to the examples: also the everyday game (meat) is thought to be given by Ischoko, at least in a "seer" tale,, and Ischoko's name is pronounced in lucky-hunt-wishing greeting in the !hongongoschá tale. Also misfortune is attributed to Ischoko, as far as another tale depicts: a lost small child's mother is consoled with words like "We shall search for the child, if she is not found, then it is a matter of Ischoko!". The individual fate and the creation is also a matter of Ischoko: the blindness of a blnd man is attributed to schoko. And the blind says: "also I am a creature of Ischoko". Thus, probably it cannot be distorted by mistranslations of expressions. There are myths in which Ischoko features entirely alone. Ischoko features in origin myths, sometimes alone. Ischoko's name is used in magical formulae, as mentioned forgame-wishing. All this disturbs me in naming Haine as monotheistic figure.

I am glad that You know many about recent Hadzabe beliefs. This makes the article more valuable: diachronic discussion is much more interesting than a single snapshot of the 1930s. You know much about recent beliefs on Haine.

Do You know also what are the recent beliefs on Ischoko? Is Ischoko still present, or has Ischoko declined? (Maybe just like seers, commemorated in folklore epic but seemingly absent from recent Hadzabe life Is anything known about the process between 1930s and recently — what could have be the intermediate steps? How could Haine achieve a monopoly? Even if we accept a serious distortion about Kohl-Larsen's record (or the failure of his method, resorting to informants), Ischoko's role was so abundant and axial, that it would amount a total fake if Kohl-Larsen had done such a mistake. Or has Ischoko, once such a central figure, became extinct in 70 years? If not, what are the recent beliefs about Ischoko? Has Ischoko degraded to a secondary role? If not, what makes Haine monotheistic (contrasted to Ischoko)? Or was the diverity so great in the 1930s, that the Kohl-Larsen-interviewed families believed in Ischoko, while others did not, and by now only the non-Ischoko ones survived?

Moreover, has Hadza spiritual culture survived at all, or has just the material culture survived? Has any recent research been done in folklore things? The only thing I could mine out of the German video is that the Epembe dance survuved, but I do not know whether it is only conserved literally or experienced as a living thing.

Ischoko takes for account, Haine tries to achieve appeasement
In the myth where an disobedient woman fails to obey the food restriction, and eats too much from the foods, the blood of the whole community begins to bleed out of their noses. Ischoko comes down and takes them into account with severe words. Haine tries to appease the severe, demanding Ischoko: "heal them first! What do you win if all your creatures perish?" I accept that both the grammatical level (he/she-pronouns) and the lexical level (expressions like wife, husband) can be entirely distorted. But what about the thread of the narration? It is Ischoko who issues commandment onto people, takes them onto account, heals them and punishes them. It is Haine who want to appease the situation with mild and placating words. Even if any attributes are corrupted, the mere thread of the story suggests Ischoko's dominance and Haine's incination to appeasement. I admit taht my question is based on a gender-chauvinistic assumption (person who dominates is man, person who does appeasement is woman), still, the story is very interesting.

Now let us see the disobedient woman story: Die ungehorsamen Frauen

Schon nach der Erschaffungder Menschen waren es viele Leute geworden. Nun lebte da ein Mann, ser zwei Frauen hatte, eine große und eine kleine.

…

My translation (I try): The disobedient women

Soon after the creation of the people there were many people. There was a man who lived together with his two wives, with a big and a small one. He said to them: “Listen to my words what I give you now! We have gotten many kinds of foods, but you must may eat just a little fom them, you must not consume very much food!”

The women answered: “You, our husband, we cannot eat much from the food, we shall eat from it with measure!”

They lived on and ate just a little from the foods. Many-many days passed away.The fruits were as sweet as honey.

One day, the man wanted to undertake a trip. He spoke to the women the words: “You, my wives, I am planning a journey, I want to go to greet my brothers!”

The women answered: “Just go, it is good!”

Before he left, he spoke to the women the words again: “I ahve already told you, that you must eat few from the foods! If you eat too much, it is your matter!”

The women answered: “You, our husband, we cannot eat much from the food, we shall eat from it with measure!”

Now the man left. As soon as he had left, his small wife went out of the camp. She went to the baobab trees, took a stick and began to beat the fruits down. Very many fruits fell onto the ground. She collected them and went to the river. She sat down there and took a stone, opened the fruits with it and got a lot of flour. She mixed the flour with water, so that porridge appeared. Than she began to eat. She eat very-very much from the porridge and became oversated.

As now she was oversated, flow much blood out of her nose. She thought: “Much blood is running out of my nose, have I hurt myself maybe with the stone?” Then she set out for home. As she arrived, the other woman looked at her, seeing her bleeding nose.

All people in the camp were bleeding out of their noses. They said: “The blood that comes out of our noses means that we are ill!”

I admit, such single and isolated expressions like “Haine, Ischoko's wife” are prone to mistranslation. But it is embedded in the very logic and thread ot the story that Ischoko is a severe, demanding figure and Haine is an appeasing figure, thus it can be less prone to mistranslations. I admit, the straightforward conclusion is gender-chauvinistic; moreover, it can be severely undermined by the presence of “converse role cast between genders” in Hadzabe folklore, I shall describe it below as an advocatus diaboli.

Motif of primordial dominance of women over men
I admit that there is also a myth which claims that in the dep past it was the women who had the weapons, and it was the men who cared for household, and the roles wsapped in conflicts, resolved eventually by Ischoko. This may challenges my whole argumentation above, although the above cited story does not show any signs of the inversion of gender roles: the man gives counceils, the women obey. It would take an assumption that inversion of gender roles is restricted to mythological figures to prove that Ischoko and Haine behave according to their gender roles.

Now let us see what I promised: the story about a time where the roles between the two genders were right the opposite of the recent situation. This story may play the role of an advocatus diaboli against my own argumentation above: Wie die Männer von den Frauen die Waffen bekamen

How the man have received the weapons from the women

In old times the weapons belonged to the women.

Field work
I admit that Kohl-Larsen seems to have worked with informants instead of participant observation (or even if he did participant observation, he had to resort to Berger's linguistical knowledge). If the majority of the records comes form the main informant Schangwitscha "the chief of the Tindiga", then it can result in a founder effect: the very small size of the sample can make the survey non-representative.

Non-epic parts of spiritual culture
Thank You for telling me about the moon taboo, and moon's relatedness to the epheme ceremonial. From the myth texts I have read till now, it was not clear for me why Haine is said to have a lunar connotation. The myths themselves I have read till now did not suggest anything like that. I read Your explanation with thankfulness.

Is this epheme ceremonial the same what I have here in Kohl-Larsen's book as "Epembe"? He records two origin myths about it, but neither of them mention Haine's lunar connotation. Moreover, they do not mention neither moon nor Haine at all. Iinstead, it is Ischoko who sends messengers in order to give the Epembe dance to people. In the first one, Ischoko sends Indaya, in the second one, Ischoko sends pelicans. Yet, one of these myths is strongly linked to the night (without any mention of moon). Thus I am very thankful that You mentioned the existence of moon taboo, and the lunar relatedness of epheme.

I am glad to see that this Epembe dance does not seem to be a forgotten thing: there is a short video show about the Epembe dance in the very end of the long German video material (Kein Gebrauch für Entwicklung - Die letzten Wildbeuter in Ostafrika / No need for development). I am glad to see on the video that it is still a living practice, although I do not know how living is that (is it just conserved, or still experienced with full heart?) In any case, if we know enough about that, we can include a standalone section about that.

Diachronic discussion
I am glad to read that You have knowledge about recent Hadzabe beliefs (Haine as God, standard translation for Mungu etc.). Thus, we can write a diachronical treatment in the article, that is much more valuable than a simple synchronical snapshot. Was it only a syncretistic process, or was it a living, natural variation process? Hunter-gatherers were not so static and uncanging as commonsense thinks about them. They accomplished large changes even before/without alien influences. For example, Elkin suggests that there were changing processes in Australian Aborigine cultures, that took part before white men's arrival (e.g. the directed spread of circumcision), also the reconciliation of different marriage rules is an example for change of inner origin. But as for the Christian Hadzabe, I suppose their views can be regarded rather as a syncretism.

Moreover, some of the tales recoded by Kohl-Larsen recorded depict seers, medicineman-like figures. But the German video definitely says that "Sie haben weder Häuptlinge noch Schamane" (they have neither chiefs nor shamans). Maybe this is also a sign of a diachronical process (although not of a welcome one: disappearance of mythological specialists). Thus, the article can contain some mentioning of dynamical, diachronical processes.

Background
How do You think, are things like   true, or are they written out of emotion? And does it matter in our work, does it amount to scientific discredition? Frank Marlowe does cite Kohl-Larsen, thus he does not seem to be discredited.