Relational Epistemology, Immediacy, and Conservation

Or, What Do the Nayaka Try to Conserve?

Authors

  • Nurit Bird-David University of Haifa
  • Danny Naveh University of Haifa

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1558/jsrnc.v2i1.55

Keywords:

Nayaka, animism, conservation

Abstract

In this paper we ask whether and in what way Animism relate to conservation, with focus on one group, the Nayaka of South India. We argue that in order to pursue this question one must first recognize the immediate quality of Nayaka Animism as well as some important aspects in their relational epistemology (Bird-David 1999, 2006). Our analysis shows that Nayaka are not committed to conserve their environment. Their concern lies mainly with keeping good relations with specific co-dwellers in the shared environment in ways and for reasons which we explore in the paper. This concern has indeed some conservationist effects, but as byproduct. Our analysis also shows a valuable way-of-knowing, as much as the nowadays appreciated ‘indigenous knowledge’. These arguments are supported by Nayaka ethnography, and are further clarified by a preliminary heuristic comparison between the model which can be read into the ethnography and the model which informs an ambitious international program for biodiversity conservation which is implemented in the Nilgiris of South India, where the Nayaka live.

Author Biographies

Nurit Bird-David, University of Haifa

Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Haifa, Israel

Danny Naveh, University of Haifa

Department of Sociology and Anthropology

References

Bateson, G. 1979 Steps to an Ecology of Mind (New York: Ballantine Books).

Bird-David, N. 1989 ‘The People and the Ethnographic Myth: An Introduction to the Study of the Naiken’, in P. Hockings (ed.), Blue Mountains: The Ethnography and Biography of a South Indian Region (New Delhi: Oxford University Press): 249-81.

1990 ‘The Giving Environment: Another Perspective on the Economic System of Gatherer-Hunters’, Current Anthropology 31.2: 183-96. doi:10.1086/203825

1992 ‘Beyond “The Original Affluent Society”: A Culturalist Reformulation’, Current Anthropology 33.1: 25-47. doi:10.1086/204029

1994a ‘Sociality and Immediacy: Or, Past and Present Conversations on Bands’, Man 29.3: 583-603. doi:10.2307/2804344

1994b ‘The Nilgiri Tribal Systems: A View from Below’, Modern Asian Studies 28.2: 339-55.

1995 ‘Hunter-Gatherers Kinship Organization: Implicit Roles and Rules’, in E. Goody (ed.), Social Intelligence and Interaction: Expressions and Implications of the Social Bias in Human Intelligence (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press): 68-84.

1996 ‘Puja, or Sharing with the Gods? On Ritualized Possession among Nayaka of South India’, Eastern Anthropologist 49.3-4: 259-75.

1999a ‘ “Animism” Revisited: Personhood, Environment, and Relational Epistemology’, Current Anthropology 40 (Supplement): S67-S91. doi:10.1086/200061

1999b ‘The Nayaka of the Wynaad, South India’, in R. Lee and R. Daly (eds.), Cambridge Encyclopedia of Hunters and Gatherers. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press): 257-60.

2004 ‘No Past, No Present: A Critical-Nayaka Perspective on Cultural Remembering’, American Ethnologist 31.3: 406-21.

2005 ‘Illness-Images and Joined Beings: A Critical-Nayaka Perspective on Intercorporeality’, Social Anthropology 12.3: 325-39. doi:10.1017/S0964028204000539

2006 ‘Animistic Epistemology: Why do some Hunter-Gatherers not Depict Animals?’, Ethnos 71.1: 33-50. doi:10.1080/00141840600603152

Daniels, R. 2006 ‘Integrating Science and Management of Biodiversity in the Western Ghats’, Current Science 90.4: 481.

Descola, P. 1992 ‘Societies of Nature and the Nature of Society’, in A. Kuper (ed.), Conceptualizing Society (New York: Routledge): 107-26.

1994 In the Society of Nature: A Native Ecology in Amazonia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

1996 ‘Constructing Natures: Symbolic Ecology and Social Practice’, in P. Descola and G. Palsson (eds.), Nature and Society: Anthropological Perspectives (London and New York: Routledge): 82-102.

Dyer, M.I., and M.M. Holland 1988 ‘Unesco’s Man and Biosphere Program’, BioScience 38.9: 635.

Endicott, K., and P. Bellwood 1991 ‘The Possibility of Independent Foraging in the Rain Forest of Peninsular Malaysia’, Human Ecology 19.2: 151-85. doi:10.1007/BF00888744

Fabian, J. 1983 Time and the Other: How Anthropology Makes its Object (New York: Columbia University Press).

Gardner, P.M. 2000 Bicultural Versatility as a Frontier Adaptation among Paliyan Foragers of South India (Lewiston, Queenstone, Lampeter: The Edwin Mellen Press).

Gibson, J.J. 1979 The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception (Boston: Houghton Mifflin).

Harvey, G. 2005 Animism: Respecting the Living World (New York: Columbia University Press).

Hallowell, A.I. 1955 ‘Ch. 11: Temporal Orientation in Western Civilization and in a Preliterate Society’, Culture and Experience (New York: Schocken Books): 216-36.

Ingold, T. 2000 The Perception of the Environment: Essays in Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill (London and New York: Routledge).

Merculieff, L. 1994 ‘Western Society’s Linear Systems and Aboriginal Cultures: The Need for Two Way Exchanges for the Sake of Survival’, in E.S. Burch and L. Ellanna (eds.), Key Issues in Hunter Gatherer Research (Oxford: Berg): 405-15.

Naveh, D. 2003 ‘PPNA Jericho: A Socio-political Perspective’, Cambridge Archaeological Journal 3.1: 83-96. doi:10.1017/S0959774303000052

2007 ‘Continuity and Change in Nayaka Epistemology and Subsistence Economy: A Hunter Gatherer Case from South India’. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Haifa.

Overing, J., and A. Passes 2000 The Anthropology of Love and Anger: The Aesthetics of Conviviality in Native Amazonia (London: Routledge).

Silberbauer, G.B. 1981 Hunter and Habita in the Central Kalahari Desert (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

Siroli Shekhar, C. 2001 ‘Biosphere Reserve Management in Theory and Practice: Case of Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve, Western Himalaya, India’, Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy 4: 205-19. doi:10.1023/A:1014894108963

Stringer, M.D. 1999 ‘Rethinking Animism: Thoughts from the Infancy of our Discipline’, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 5: 541-56.

Venugopal, D. 2004 ‘Development-Conservation Dilemma in the Nilgiri Mountains of South India’, Journal of Mountain Science 1.1: 74-80.

Vivieros de Castro, E. 1998 ‘Cosmological Deixis and Amerindian Perspectivism’, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 4.3: 469–88.

Published

2008-04-12

How to Cite

Bird-David, N., & Naveh, D. (2008). Relational Epistemology, Immediacy, and Conservation: Or, What Do the Nayaka Try to Conserve?. Journal for the Study of Religion, Nature and Culture, 2(1), 55–73. https://doi.org/10.1558/jsrnc.v2i1.55