User:Sanne steens/sandbox

Toevoeging aan: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahlins–Obeyesekere_debate

Opbouw: a. de feitelijke achtergronden m.b.t. de dood van Cook. b. de achtergrond van het werk van Sahlins, m.n. in dit issue b. de kritiek van Obeysekere

The Sahlins–Obeyesekere debate is an academic controversy in anthropology about the death of the British explorer James Cook, particularly whether the native Hawaiians believed him to be Lono, a deity (or akua) associated with fertility, agriculture, rainfall, music and peace. The debate took shape in 1992, when Gananath Obeyesekere published The Apotheosis of Captain Cook, which criticized the work of Marshall Sahlins on the issue. In addition to the factual issues, the debate has become symbolic of deeper issues in anthropology, including whether Western scholars can truly understand non-Western cultures.[1][2][3][4]

Addition: The deification issue. In order to understand the debate, it is essential to know the events around the deification issue of Captain James Cook. During the greater part of Cook’s visit to the Sandwich Islands (present day Hawaii), he was always treated like he was royalty. The inhabitants and their chiefs and priests would very often make Cook the guest of honour and make sacrifices and offers for him. Cook arrived at the Sandwich Islands at the same time the annual Hawaiian Makahiki festival took place. During this festival the Hawaiians celebrated the returning of their lost god of fertility of the land: Lono. Upon Lono’s return, the god was supposed to fertilize and repossess the land. Now, it was Cook who showed up right at the time of the festival. The inhabitants treated Captain Cook in the exact same way as the rituals adherent to the Makahiki festival would suggest (Sahlins, 1981, p. 17). When Cook returned to Hawaii to survive the winter, he arrived at Kealakekua Bay on January 17th 1779. The inhabitants supposedly welcomed him by saying “Now our bones shall live, our aumakua (ancestral spirit) has returned” (Sahlins, 1981, p. 7). This caused Marshall Sahlins to interpret that Cook was perceived as a god to the native Hawaiians.

Sahlins and Obeyesekere’s critique When anthropologist Marshall Sahlins started his PhD, he examined patterns in social classification in Polynesia and the historical ethnography. This is an interest he researched extensively in his future works and became his main focus. For his conclusions, Sahlins uses multiple narratives from different backgrounds to support his arguments. His opponent in this debate is Gananath Obeyesekere, a Sri-Lankan anthropologist. He questions the idea that Cook was received as a god, even though it is a reoccurring story in many Hawaiian historical writings. Obeyesekere doubts that the inhabitants of Hawaii made Cook their god; he argues that Europeans constructed this idea in the 18th century to keep up their appearance of being powerful civilizers. The native Hawaiians expected their god Lono to come as an invisible company. Obeyesekere says that the natives would not consider Cook and his immense crew as their god. A god who does not look Hawaiian or speaks the indigenous language would go against the natives’ expectations (Obeyesekere, 1992, p. 20-21). The fact that religious procession of Lono happened around the same time as Cook’s arrival, Obeyesekere considers to be wrongfully related to each other by Marshall Sahlins. Sahlins, according to Obeyesekere, is wrong in thinking that there is a resemblance between the structure of the ritual calendar of the Makahiki festival and the regular events that happened (Obeyesekere, 1992, p. 57).

Moore, Jerry D. 2009. "Marshall Sahlins: Culture Matters" in Visions of Culture: an Introduction to Anthropological Theories and Theorists, Walnut Creek, California: Altamira, pp. 365-385.

Obeyesekere, G. (1992). The Apotheosis of Captain Cook. European Mythmaking in the Pacific. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Sahlins, M. (1981). Historical Metaphors and Mythical Realities: Structure in the Early History of the Sandwich Islands Kingdom. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.

References[edit source] 1	Jump up ^ Howe, K. R. (1996-06-01). "Review article: The making of cook's death". The Journal of Pacific History. 31 (1): 108–118. doi:10.1080/00223349608572810. ISSN 0022-3344. 2	Jump up ^ Parker, Samuel K. (1995-03-01). "The Revenge of Practical Reason? A Review Essay On Gananath Obeyesekere's The Apotheosis of Captain Cook". Oceania. 65 (3): 257–267. doi:10.1002/j.1834-4461.1995.tb02507.x. ISSN 1834-4461. 3	Jump up ^ Friedman, Jonathan (1997-02-01). "How "Natives" Think: About Captain Cook, For Example". American Ethnologist. 24 (1): 261–262. doi:10.1525/ae.1997.24.1.261. ISSN 1548-1425. 4	Jump up ^ Borofsky, Robert (1997-04-01). "Cook, Lono, Obeyesekere, and Sahlins". Current Anthropology. 38 (2): 255–282. doi:10.1086/204608.