Symbolic and Structural Archaeology (New Directions in Archaeology)

200 Pages·2007·2.79 MB·English

by  Ian Hodder

Susan Kus 50
hy posolihPso is la amethod ve itof celferthought, that ofis, al cirotsih’facts’ ng irucsbotheir on itisopin htiwa conceptual
al citircs. sensuoicsis nochTmethod is of al icurcimportance rk owemarfupon ch ihwtheir ce netsixend ng aisinaem
in ng isserddaquestions ng inrecnocan al cirotsihcontext, orf dependent.
the ly nons aemve awe hto understanding history rea ur Ocontemporary al itneirepal xeicocosntext r-eis vo
indirect. ry otsiHes odnot ak epsor flf estind aneither is the ly gnimled enimrehtedwby the institutions nd agsnirutcurts
al icost itneiscsed vomerom rfan al cirotsihcontext. As ed sinagrof o-etaty. teicossa le ssaehe nd nTeacvissneherpmoc
ty noP-uaelreM(1974, p. 313) as d: hiaser an We vcenbe ’the al cint remnorivones-ed tseuscgve eironas ahb(cid:151)alof aicis htos
past, it is ly nole cata cepsre ofebch us ihwis there or fus to ly iracolour the ns oitseuqng we ild rbto eia fal of icostheory,
question. he Tquestions me ocom rfund s, athus the ly ralucitraped en crhofnwierin htiwthe context of a-nretla
es snopserin le picnirpdo not exhaust al cirotsihrealitcey, nis ve al ex ilpimtos. ccmroons fsoing tinsreecunoQcthe s,nigiro
historical ty ilaeres odnot nd epedupon em htor fits n, oitasinagrond aoperation of es ex lipmotceire coaans
existence.’ al ictoheoSretical se ruocsind daour understanding understandable theoretical preoccupation. t, eYin this pre-
of history thus nd epedon the poetry or ty revopof our s-euq occupation it sy ais eto ht se goilsof al utdhe ividnnd iathe
tions. Philosophy, both ns oitasilarewn as neagrdomrf ve el itvcof eejce lnbeiurespxend arepresentation in society.
immediate huve man itcelce neirepxefer-nd faletshas ought al In icin atores ethceoreticsians sve ne aaoar cghas fas
upon our representations of the an muhdris ama, the lyno ng ity teisceosvnith th iwiws, laogthe elan of vital ’repro-
tool ve awe hto te aulavely lacitirctty he idilavnd ssaesto sa duction’ nd aal ’ng ugdirivtovhe iwns dtaanhieas ea ’, mlto
the limitations of se ehtquestions ch ihwng we irbto history sh ilpmoccsoaciety’s r, if eve i-vaveiteds. dhe newnliowe H
in our attempt to create a context of ng ks ch ineiaeehmswto al uns daa as emto an end, nd aif we ny edve itcthe ejabusas
extend lf estibeyond ic fal iour icceond psasalcirotsih ry le asin asecceal sniur octhoesory, then veain ewe lace noga
context. ng inaal nemonehas peipemal ito cosa formation.
en hes Wvwe ic et lsfeitsche reupossk atof ngitcelfer ry asid on sietocaTo ecinvfniueraof al the irm coofswe
al citeroupeon hta(cid:151)rgumlentas, icosan we in cgeto btrace ht gst iismnion the an muhalcle iatecof rsoehtur o(cid:151)laicos
through the es nilof suppositions that underpin ur oreom ns oitng seuqisiem htnby gocng euirltimaas etely bed sabon
ic ficepsts nemugrand aer vocnutheir ly lacihposol-liahpreneg ur oal udice wn nveiiredpoxneind arepresentation. To be
ed sir, eve. sabeen whowHwe concentrate ur oattention on a r, aelcthis nis ot to ny edtheir contextualisation in a social-
al cirotcsoinht(cid:151)ic eflxiact, iecposit ssy ais eto ht se goilofs al cirotsihve itcejbusor retnicontext. In t, cafwe st stumisni
the ng ile ssaapmoccneof stheoretical s. krowemarfisis hT on the on itingocerof is htcontext to ow lla onaitasilanosrep
se uacebit sy is aese to ufnocrepresentation th iwna otion of of ur otheoretical ng idns oiitseiduiole syqncroaticivhaw
description at the ic el fst omivcof eeplsan al itneirepxenda s.mrof ly esIt iceris pat jthe uncture of tct he ejbusin htiwthe
representational context. If se ingoctwe ehe rsocial- al cirocotntsext ih(cid:151)latihat cosht giwe mly batiforpingeb
historical context as the or jamng inimretedor tcafof i-repxe al cng iitsra eiepenrtrogire oog, ninoitseuqceehrt(cid:151)oflaicos
ce nend arepresentation, then it is the se atchat the er solcthe ns oitseuqthat not ly nes odulng cniisse ohtserdtheda
al cirotcsonithext (cid:151)altelrnative aicch oihswwe re ngainimaxe er tcarahcof society, but so ng ilsase ohsttehe rddacharacter
approximates al cito rocotnstour iehx(cid:151)t, nt eselrpaicothes al udiof vice ndeniriepxend arepresentation in htiwsociety.
ed ifimore ceal pcsirnd aotscoinctohncere(cid:151)ntte laiin cos re it eiHmis portant not se uto fnoca theoretical or e-rper
appear the ry alubacovnd athe ns oitseuqng we irbto history. sentational le ath icwsthe ns oisnemof idalcigolodohtem
ns oitseuQthat preoccupy our al citilown p-seooircuosocsid ts sve igaotlrhadoitieonas. ally ehcircAnegied xhceaorppathe
re sy aaeto se opnd aen em ely vid lesatsuihe lqtieiaraglvimis al udiviin dal nicigoltohe eahccornatext er htiethrough the
of ry alubacovnd ainstitutions in htiwthe context of other reconstruction of ur al odiovamhebor through idiosyncratic
complex s. eiteicosis his Tto ay sthat al ictsositneicss identification. Yet, our theoretical ry iuqnenlyis ot irassecen
interested in the study of ex lpmocve es iateihcoa sinatrec ed timilto the on itacifitnedind aon itpircsedof es mertxeof
ty ilibissopof ng isopquestions ch ihwre aat the me asmeit d, esilaanonyrmous ened esgiland nur aooisvraehepbnd eadof
al i-nosse repvich udunasind e. aly lcblaaseiilcaBoresneg unique ts cly alaired. teaas tmsefinamRather, if an under-
ng ils taagiutsdre evanciontexts ch ihse wre aolto ctheir wno ng idnatsof histle ory bisstis hen opthe ns oitseuqsk we ofa
al icond sahistorical contexts of g, ninaemthey an cseop history st umbe ultimately ed sabon the on itingocernda
questions at ic fel iry vceeevof pa lsy, ralubacovconceptual exploration of the ts nemeleof ve itctehe jhuman busu-tis
organisation, nd aal iretamexperiential context. cent, eYis ation ed rahsen ewtebur ont eserpcontext, the ly nme oarfof
the contexts they ng itagitsere vanraie, in t, cafnt ereffidn-oc ul fgnice nneraeefemrnd e, vaahom we rfch ihwwe cannot
texts, the on itcarferrather than replication of their questions nd atsaside, 4 nd athe al cirotsihsituation g.nitagitwe re seavni
rs effothe ty ilibissopof demonstrating thty eiir larenegor of
al gy cigoololporhotnAeahcras de ahamsubstantial
ng iretvhe ocsidconceptual ns aemto their n.oitasilareneg
contributions to ur ounderstanding of the operations of
r, evetwhe oHproximity of contexts as htry he eskal veirr
ex lpmge ocal ns. eis iintaeicot ot, scheYcoly spmisr-etcarahc
that the apparent concreteness nd acy aidemmiof esusthe si
ed sies in by gntahe hrm coe, mulovfnd on aitasinagroof
under examination te atilicaftheon iir tacifieral icndaosas
al iretamproduces tgire ch onuan; ashcontingent cupon
idealMatters and material 51
es ng giin ng ntinnd rin aehe deraaomhcrepresentational al citilopr. edro’Legitimatied on’ sustre ehothe in mis
sphere. order An ng iof rneparnd eesenmtaation is se es se chkng uch onintvsisof neetesihhe rasm, wspmoa cne
inextricably en vowretnith iwan er droty iof vitcatyin eicos ttopics radas ition, pattern aul-nd tuahforwill aty, as lewas
nd athus is ly lauqeal citircf-to undertslthe anding eof sthe ness.7 is hon itseTuqon itamition giettlsof ehe uqis theof
production of ty eicos(Touraine e-lpmoca 197re 7). ehTis on itinifedon nd itacifitsujaesital iivictoits cer drosaof in the
mentary es irof ly eslquestions uyto et be fnd alyetauqeda ndals audit ies tvaas lls eirdnabof ioth oes gitnd ivaitto cthe a
ed sserddaby anthropological ly tehesy, gioloeachcraerp to natural a er dros. tms neteof iveat hTnd athe ons, iitseuq
questions ed sel opvic of tceteat lhe alitdctof he etjhe bus aed scy ly oarecognition pmpiof tmnthe in of is ot iigsel
in htiwal ich cuosscoa ntech uxst. on itseuqne Ois the concept of on itsiocniin iettfhe y, edbal ut inicer droosof a
formulation of coa ncept o-icy camoit es isttaliegrof ea lto as natural l.ato relation uda ividnto relation iin the er drond a
al citiloporder. cy animnhot eian retnt is igeLattribute of ul fgnins nohe aiTsetonns tmemhgiat dity eicossa sa
society. quesa tion is It ed sopin htiwan muha ofer dro concepts of natura al alal uidicvior, edroer ddsrntoihe nd a a
ng inaeperhaps mnd aon itsea uqly le nboiciin tscthe esloaipd or re jaamdeterminants of cf-hartacter he lsoof cietty’s he es
of ct ejbutshe al ciin rhottsiiwhal ind caotshe context aof production8 ne iaruoT(ty icapacits 1977or ), on itcafonpu
complex society. re lf eet. nemnorivneits sthtere hind Wts saalicirotsxihan e
It ps ahrepis ly notche ontext of ex lpmesociteicos st ilairetamunderstanding of ctohe nstitution alicosof a
in erehwty ilibistshe opgh ee irhgof of al iera etamdi-nam order, ve itty this iacapeacrcns epoed ld ognofreato linefan
on itatsefcond ncaeptual on itacifierabstracnd tion aesdivorp al cirotsal ihudedivnd sie. dciohicaninThat grx oceas, riM
an experiential reprnd esaentational ld eife5or cnegtrefhe me al teicnoasy, rogetacture a er htruhe fbut as understood
of a particular conceptualisation of society. a t-abedis is hT an muhed dulcnity eiconsain tuas re dt imhcS(1971). It asw
le bapong iinyft, ilbput mat sk iithe rtshe reof onitcnitsidvo al citceluanderstass nitdth ing ihe dwend naeris htawathat
between ex lpmocex lpmoc-nonnd aidit ld as, eiteicousocsbe natule rct oee, jsbotly he nois e, gdeled of tnwesoernpkto
that in htiwin complex gee dramatices eito tsebicoswe al icss eonss, noitalumrofsin uoicng sonth olicwathe erhtruf
es see aon eirin rttcancghe iifof ietcedjboal icof osproduction, understanding that ty eicuoltimately sis constituted by
institutionalisation al icof acotivity, sn-consoequently cnd a ls auding ivretinedniial nto ins oitalercosth iwne aonother,
ceptual on itacifiernd absatraction heal Ticrelatof oions. s that rx hoped aMto nt orfnochumanity, thus nd asociety,
distinction of ex lpmoces iom teicrosfex lpmoc-nonesiteicos i-tith ve iigwteclal ein ciprostshrithech he ptue. isciohca W
so is led siraetcarahcse ral uiel in aotrecccva sby oof iesdtlhat on itamse ruocal eve riano to chon iooftcaof dsictates an c
is bory th aser smele rin tbche oiesfnsnd oapcontheeTxt. an authority al nretxeto society, that to an is, authority
ex lpmocon itaitnereffidof ty ivitcarepresnd entaation in al ve iicted s.ixarpaoegsin rcls aaugdnd oyebinvidenithe
complex es ts itseeifclf iosneasmtias potential er drosid-deen ss enes noisIn tuds re leooal hieiccichotssiwnrcoc
ng iresolution, not el ly novty eof ivitclaat tthehe but at authoral ity nve iiis txno aarefe, pcrrnd cofaon itoftsehe uq
coll nceeu ipdrteuouB(al el wvas eled tehenor ). 77he 91fT the on itamitigeled al ivcloof er da rosoed r-ssoeis pnd affid
re-constitution of er droin htiwch uscontexts nda’permits ently. al icrs ch edrooust suSmar eppaarbitrary9 to their
es riuqertnt ehe mpolevededdy obts gof a srialhaciceof ps participed annts iaofss tsal uesees llppipcnnaan ito urpby
el veof th ng iwilstihe arl] aicos[to l-anoitaras e, srso uocsid authority nt ereof fa fidorder. ch ung iSredesrolpicnirp
ze isystematize nd a[experienceeu id]’ ruoB(p. 1977, 233, ch ve iahwh’authorised’ al ion itnecvnocosry avy.llacirotsih
n. ).61 ndne aed ikovmey andates vgs nhve niich iTnaouditas shcnas
ed ung girat eabhhis ein Wrpe, art, this at ats cepsof a al cigore s. einomrahlge reoceonatmly, sof mMoicr-edrtohe
ld eifed al nse irgof cuthematically oin iocsre sm-liodaac-er es lch pne icideinng ed iashirfilmpawiretses as uiddtnhieicos
ex lpes iin ton ld seiriapcmoocseito se fra uin oof csnoin-d ce ed nevreies lfepeirccnty nierof iocpostcto he tyeicos(
ex lpmocrm othe socfieties; nd a’nature’ ty eiof costheof or understood reification), as ts neto mugran amuhon nature,
al citilop-oicoser drolynd liang ifced seainerfcniito be ceps al cs eipmor pato to tnayhe an of dhistory (Toura1ine 977,
ed ssal ese rirdcduaoin oex in lcpmsoscis. editeinscoositseuQ pp. se es ehltnd pch iac5i0nTo ). ihrpw16 ’subordinate alicos
on the ’nature’ of ty eicosnd iftheir on italumrofin a n-oc ws ais tslto hyat lon itcaanand nd eacsnartthem’, neiaruoT
ceptual ld eifthat potenties alasly ng iitistonphe of gocer as happropriately me en antvhe of al iicosatem’gwarrants’
al citcoincleopt p-oicoal sier dcra ooin or scontradis-of a on itacif(ir1of al9c7ay 47, 6ne iasa2rwuoThp. ). By (ibid.)
tinction, both cto oncea pt al udividniof parttiche ipant in ed tsetghgat al iucossatemnt arrawan ihe T’risty eaicof rosga
thal is icoser drocoto ncend pt a aal cisof yhnpature.6 In a n, oigilterhat le iof tnacremty eicosstate-centered, that of
conceptual ld ees isiconcept fa no-ch igcioohswcerof a industrial ty eicoseconomile c’ al pciromtis siihhsnd Tal-uc
al citiloper drothat is al us-divids natsve ind dondaibtahe tural ch tekss, n, ofigeics liteiilreof cnd oonompicls,aeb
tinguishablin e, part, om rftnatuhe ral order, ofnumber a ss elehtenoninis adee, quate vitsto conecea pter gvgeuwosh
concomitant themes al se riucoof cnt os.esserepisvdlesmeht ul fgninaeng mind gmeehtaneof lal ilcoasahtecnt amrraa was
ne Oof tre omhe interesting problematic inse es mehtirto a on ise targal ex in uilptmiooscs.eecictvin esincoiosiof dsthe
this context tqhe uestion is of the ’legitimatio-on’ icosof a To ce uderon ittseuqhe al icosof atemts narrain wanthro-
Susan Kus 52
gy olopto ss historical ora goutline of es dominant iisgoloedi the nt empoleval ecdigolof omend tsaipeal cihtes.tnemugra
nt eiciffusnito ta heoretical ve itcepsks ch reeipehbswoth to me ors Sehne (pve osooar liahgpas hfas to rt essathat s-ipe
accommodate an understanding of the ss enhcnd iraalcirotsih al cigolometstatements in e, rat, cafal cihtestatements
ty icificepsof se al rial uucodcioin vssiiddnex lipmocesiteicos dt narB(7, 691pp. 6-8)y, .) lsuone iovbOof the st omr-ewop
nd ato ce nereferch usan understanve ding itcein jbi-ruepsxe ul fns oitailicnocerof the le buodal tovipthrust of the concept
ce nend an. oisserpxeny Aattempt to look er solat cthe n-oc of natull re, as ethe as wip hsnoitaleren ewtebthe concepts of
ceptual ds leifthat se ial rese tcarriahcucoin cosisdexlpmoc nature nd aty eicosis to be nd uofin ’s xrthaoMught. heT
es itell icosidwemonstrate that unquestioned ls aeppato dsog ed on itailitcnocerceffis ele ian muhhy; llwacitcety laeidicosis
nd ags nikdo not constitute the entirety of the ct ejbusmatter understood ed dulcnias in nature, nature is understood aas
of ch use. sruocsidhe Tconceptual ds led koevniiin fchus as ety tal he itrleiicboiesssy. rogeotachpWof ch usan r-ednu
e, sruocsidrather, ap lrevothe conceptual ld eed ikovnfiin uro ng idas natishmportant es cneuqesnocor fcontemporary
contemporary al icond saal cihposolihpse ruocsto ida reom se ral uiond ccasoisds, ixarpor fthe anthropologist there
nt acifingisee rgethdan ld uowbe admitted by ur otraditional ns iamerthe re ic omson aitseuqbto as er htehwthis lebuod
myths of the history ly laciof ds rfaigry s. caedeieterheas Vps thrust of cona cept of natnt uare vng eilto elris aand eaver
on issucsitdhat s, wollofit an cbe demonstrated that alicos concept of on itamitigelin ex lpmos. ceiteicosI think anwe c
se ruocsiin dcertain ex lpmes oces kiotvecnoinceicpts osof er wsy. this nleavion ittseuqamriffahe Tethnographic nda
ss ergo(rphistoral yi), cospractice al nd iacocsontract, n-oc al cirotsihliterature s, edng ivthoriorugh ptanicsaa finventory
cepts h, cihwin htiwin atreca ld eifof theoretical argument, of the ms rofthat the ip hsnoitalerof nature to culture takes,
underpin ur ocontemporary al ice. soruny oscAsidn-imaxe ce netdhiat veal reis htntheemgatic us al cicouris fcto under-
ation of the ’definitions’ of ch usconcepts nd atheir e-lpmi on itng iadnastsinagrond ang rn iein tnseaw-enomns.eiteicos
mentation in conceptual structurings in ve italanreitlacos Further, or ch jusames mehtthose as of order, structure nda
contexts ld uowce nahneour wn al ciohposolihpnsoitcelfer pattern al ve iocrurpcto both coa ncept of nature nda
both on ty eicosnd aon history. society, nd ase iif ngotcheat rwe me itnd ce aapre sathe
Returning to ic ftihe cepnt emsugraon onitamitigel ns oing al csiintdiericmrirdto evothe on itinifedof aliny acos
sketched r, eilraeit ed ugas rawthat th iwngtihe saercni ed ver drond ialas thought, then the rhythms nd apatterns
on itacifierof a concept al of al icictiolosp-or oicosorder, the le baal vin criesysnhly abpting oure rito asosegre cbeaen
question of legitimation of ch usan er drolf ts neseerpstias ed vlly loain cvitinrtche iconceptualisation nd astructuring of
ng ivloat vst anelitwo conceptual s: tecafthe on italerof the al ica oordesr.
al icosorder to al udividniparticipants in this er drond athe ed tve sond aebeu agidrguouas B(sAs 1977, p. 4) 6as1h
relation of the al icosorder to an order al of cisyhnpature. It remarked: ed ry hesvilEb’atseer drotends to produce (to ryev
is the nd oceset cafof the question of legitimation, the s-euq nt ereffides end argnt th eery iwredevffids) naemthe natural-
tion it as es sin irathe conceptual ld eifal of icoer dsronda ization of its wn oarbitrariness.’ he T’degree’ to ch ihwnda
natural order, that is of ry amirpinterest to is htnt eserps-id the ’means’ by ch iex es ss hlipemtwoecricdotdshe aemlborp
th n. oisisucWrn ea cnocor fthe al utneveon itacilppato the of naturalisation nd athon ius tamitigelof al the icoer drosrea
al cigoloeahcrd ocerraof ts nemugraon the on itseuqof the backdrop to the on isnetof ge nand hacty ilibatsin the
legitimation, it is the us cofon ed vitehe cip rhsnoitalerepof er droof ty ivitcand athe er droof representation in chus
these two rs edrothat ht gimbe st omly lacigolodohtemn-oc he s. Teiteicos’degree’ of this ’tendency’ in is, part, an ctepsa
nt einevto is htal itinige atsof em lborpformulation. of on ittahe silamrofof the on itseuqof cy amitthe igelof a
If er we disnocrn etsewty eicosor fthe moment, the al icoer drosof representation in s. ech ituehe iscTos’means’
question cy of amitigelof al icosa order an cen be esto teaerc of is htin naturalisation s, evmy lovniopinion, ng omaother
ld ea ifof nt emugrathat ce nes erkefaermto natura al er droin ts, he eussiinterplay of two ’logics’ that ss erdthe daonitinifed
ry a evinteresting manner. he Ton itinifedof ’nature’ in the of al tihe corder osin on italerto natural a order: the l-aicos’
rn etsewtradities on vltowo val ntoviips, noisnneamitdure as on itasiof nature’ nd athe ’naturalisation of al tihe cosorder’.
ry ogetacnd anature as norm. he Tphilosopher rn ubpeHash At the sk irn, oiof tacifilpmison the is-sislearipxceos’
ed reffotng he iwolloon itfinifedof ’nature’ as understood in on itaof nature’ nt ais emto se iretcarahcthe on itamitigelof a
the rn etsewal cihposolihptradition: al icer dorosby on itaiits cossath iwna atural order. In isht
In its st ese dniwes’natural’ an can em’the totality of ng idnuofnocof the es lpicnnd iraprepresentation of the two
thingll s’, athat ld uove wahto ar eppain an inventory orders, al the icer odrospartakes of the ic rotsihatyilibativeni
of the e. srevinIt uan er cso flearto tws he nd aaln-irp ce nedivof e-nd fatlhe esnatural cy ar. edromitigeof Lthe
es lpicof structure by ch ihwthe or ivahebof gsniht al icoer droed setnaris augin htiwnt enime-erpa natural order,
ay mbe d. enialpxese ees hTstwo cannnot esbe kept admitting of no es vitanreed tnd ltaasefinamin edvthe il
independent of ch aeother at ny aed tacitelsihposvel ce neirepxeof natural es lnd caycphenomena. ct is ehpsTaof
of inquiry . . . (1967, p. 454) an er droof representation an cen ebe sin the ng iddebmeof
he Ttradition of rn etsewphilosophy er htrufdemonstrates al iharmony cosin the natural al ciginolhooror dter. misoWc
this dichotomy of ng el ilnin aleng amrofialpathe ry eevevr this ic rotsihaorder the on itseuqof ge nesamohcecb
idealMatters and material 53
ambiguous, ed brosbain ton he isulliof ic lcycorder, r-acnier anxiety that the ll iof wthe ds ht goimgbe r-ednusim
nations nd athe actions ngof ival cigolohtymis, rossecgederp stood nd acatastrophe rb utsidle tihe balharmony
the on isulliof reinterpretation rather than innovation. heT en ewtebthe an muhnd athe ne ie. rehpsvid(1948, p. 6)
ce irpof inevitability ry iis ts ety idvigirch ihwes onot ditmda ie he rTan eitgpyagEnof emritis ual s, sdaohgpmon ei-rthe ga
of the manipulation of the al icove order sby as’sacred’ seur cultural le cal ynd wceanend rarebirth, tishe seal cihgtymexe
al cigoor lomsocintervention. of contemporary ts nere veng aotmhe aes rutaefof the
he T’naturalisation of the al icosorder’ is nt aemto an itpygEer droof representation that point to the d-nuofnoc
characterise the delimitation of al icoer drosa in alitrap ng iof al the ind caosthe natural es rehpsof activity. In n-oc
contradistinction to na atural order of n. iamodgh uohTisht tran aismat, topomsytehs Mof in giroew nk’legneither nis
ds roffaa er taergty ilibixelfto al the icosorder, that erdro in le gigarnor nuotihsority’ (Frankfort 1948, p. 232erdro);
st umek esits naturalisation, not in the st rise fneof s’natural’ nd arm ofre eht guorbwto the d, lrowthey re enwot c-arahc
(cid:151) ’inherent in al cisyhpnature’, but in the nd ose cenofses teristic r, of evas at molpiide. gsthe rwhe eTng vaindinalkuas
the term (cid:151) in on ’itiniftehe d-flesof the es itilauqnd ac-arahc or iras raw(cid:151) al ce irve ciootfcsas a(cid:151) ht guorber droalito cos
teristics intrinsic or natural to al the icosdomain’. at hTs,i s, oahcnd ach uds sly leacre ed ireotassidhsentndiaw
the question of the cy amitigelof al the icoeder drosrewis sna recorded, not ly pmily slacihtymd.ewodahserof
in the conceptual ld eies fvsh to ich ruighnewitsstalihe dicos an imathe opTond seaMtns he oasitaan sitiplygiEvic
order om rfthe natural order by ay wof es vitthe aofgorerp portrayed by Frankfort nt eserpan important le pmaxeof the
the al icosorly dg, enr. iskstausese mps, esevoihtagTorrerpg contrast en ewteb’strategies’ of on itamitigelal of icoserdroa
include those es uch ry isheswre ivaed inedin the icrotsiha is the vn-atural a-r, order. estvhe ewiocHonvtrast enewteb
repetitiveness of the natural order, es utshe of sitemporality es se ehitgar eis tafrom tsrfck albnd awhite, nd ait is not a
nd aof e. gnahcYet, or fes vise tehtagorto erpme aoceb le pmiconstrast between the rs edroof representation of
ce ruosof cy amitigelthey st umincorporate me esolpsicnirp nt ereffidal rutluccontexts. It is the ar lucitrapalcitcelaid
of orderse ing, ing to rithus vparticuliar gnotions of the ce nalabof the on itasilaicos’of nature’ nd athe ’naturalisation
authority of history nd athe creation of order. It an cpsahrep of society’ that constitutes thea matic us cofin htiwthe erdro
be further ed ugrathat it in is the conceptualisation nda of representation en vy.in teicosia g
ng icneirepxeof al icosa er droly led aithrapsas iugnitsidomrf sy It ais eto understand al ow ihcoer drosa ch ihwdsnif
an order of al cisyhpnature that concepts of history nda on itamitigelin an er droof al cisyhnpature ld uoghow whisha
al icois xsarpan (ct epsaof the al itnetsixecontext) as r-ednu ee rgeof dty imrofnocin its representational elaborations thiw
stood in modern al cihposolihpms in etgsyseto btake e.pahs items nd as, tnth eviewpatterns nd astructures in nature. heT
ht gimWe look to Frankfort’s ns oitavresboKingshipon representation al of icoer drosa ch ihds natwspart s-ay iwd
and the st rGods as a ifillustration of se ehtts nemugrain a ed hsiugnom itrfan er droof al cisynhapture ngby ikovni
te inifedcultural context. In this book Frankfort esnimaxe es vitagorof erpal the iin acmoodspresents, perhaps, the reom
the concept of ip hsgniin kly raean itpygEnd anaimatoposeM ng iugt. icretjbnuisIn particular, the ng ippamof alch iucsosa
ns oitasilithvrioucgh texts nd ed atsefinaas min the i-tsni er droonto the ns oisnemof idtime nd ansoe, icaspsnemid
tutional character nd athe ritual accoutrements of the ceiffo ch dy iaehrlwaexhibit the superabundant patternings of
of g. nikhe Trk owof Frankfort ay mjustly be ed sicitircorf rhysical natual ries e, mcoucem lreba obrcpin the t-igel
al cirotsihng ipocselet(cid:151) or fal ng irkaecenturies eof psveofs on itamial of icer drooes sch a al tihe eihcwsoor sto-he icos
al icux olsfin terms of cultural continuity nd aelaboration. al citiloper droin ic manydms retof the constitution of an
sm icis ithirTces odnot detract, r, om evevewrohiftsegthe gus g. niredroom ea ne rrOafch s, tiansigohloceahwcraas e, w
quality of Frankfort’s ks ramertaken at their st oalmreneg ce nean dieof vlegthe representation nd astructuring of a
el veor lfthe es soprupof this present k. rowor he Tjamisseht al icoer drosis the on iic tlaobsmiynsagroof ty ivitcanda
of Frankfort’s rk owis ly tceridstated in ng iwthe ollofquote: e.caps
he an iTmatoposeMke ilas g, nedikgh, oarahPwrahc he Tcultural nd aic on liotbmayssinagroof ace ais ps
th iwmaintaining harmonious relations en ewtebanmuh ted hecme nll ocsenin ewthe traditions of altche igoloeahcra
ty eicosnd athe supernatural s, rewoypet he asw e. nde ilipsitcusOiis dhttraditrsioen, hs, ptsiagolrohcgyspoeg
emphatically not one of these but er bma emof the nd aarchitects ve aen eed hbly tlaaunqiecsafth iwthis i-tlum
community. In Egypt, on the other hand, ne oof the ed tecafal nod, islnal ld eenmoiiiedsfnea imich dfiishw
ds ad ohged dnecsedng oman.em ly laminimtactile ch nyL(l, nd aausiv), 0691conceptual
ce nacifinhe Tgce of r. inaseeis lcgInis rhtevid rd alehcaB(re ota1M964; ). 2691he al Tcitircimportance of
pt ygEthe community ad hed erlf festiom rfar efnda ng ce netiirhe depxaevreof pal itapsorientation to anmuh
uncertainty by ng iredisits nocer lurd. oga edcIt ifircas perception (cid:151) both ry osnesnd aemotional (cid:151) nd ato human
ll liaberty or fthe ke asng iof ger nvintaegerathionna c ty ivitcaas hnot ss ed esdrs ounalriletus oclhe ohpaicirscasvid
of ty eicosnd anature. ia maIn topostehe Mcommunity re oois er dmMaog. io.xl& eoB(D1977; 1ch 9n7y2; L1960;
retained le baredisnocindependence, ce nits ier lasusrw ri eloen Svtihe ). 3791ct Gafthat al itapa sng iredrotsneserp
but a man. It accepted as correlate the er vngeidnne lf estias ne oof the st omdominant es cneirepxeof g, niredroit
Susan Kus 54
ly st umirasve seicesnnt emebe liecea in dthe on itinifedof a el vis ly ralucitrapeis lhel Tl. vintletreas shtiis ng eewlin that
al icosorder. It is in the al itapsorder that al icoorder a shtgim tle he acof sng ippis apmotentially :1 1nd athus the ap manc
be both experientially ly ed cbrnd oifaniserivnd athus attain me ocebst ly omied dnsuofnocaeth iwthe territory.
gh a ie. ee hcnregdeidvof e-ot fNlry eesct evpesaof alitaps el vst uch mealEen be esas tra ansformation of the
ly oridering, rar, esvewsohems crofsenartnthe character of others, nd atwo ns oitaredisnocch ihwar eppato al be citircto
the al icosorder in the me asy, awnd afy icto eplssevthe el ls earve: e(1) lll athe on itaercof es iradnuobnd a(2) althe icos
nd asectors of al itapson itasinagrore ehwds ne onghiifha on itaulavof e.caps
ee rgedof ty ilibigelin the ng ippamof al ico-oor icsa osa ne 1. Oof the or jamcs itsiretcarahctraditionally ed suto
political order onto al itapsconsiderations is an interesting be ion al riex ltcpiamssoicecnadogng is riostdehe sofrepus
question. es lpicnirpof ip on hisntiaksinagroby territorial onitasinagro
e, ey kin ralvCris uhsle citraon al itapS’on itamrofniin at the is hl. al cTietteirlroviptoreial lon itasinagronot lyno
aralches aredoleiogvny’ oera ke gpralC), (27, 7913pp. (cid:151)1 es tatilicafve an itartsiy, niamdlarevobes ut crofnierthe o-icos
le acsof resolution of al itapsstructuring th iwlsethvree el al citilopty ilauqof es ch iurg. snaidppnry aruma aocBthiw
ro (cmiicmro, -nd iamesmacro) ch ihis wextremely ul fesuin em htpotentially al ton ihe itagcilobosof the on itacifinuof
approaching the question of the ic loon bimtyassinagroof the parts d. etareneal gcithe cTeip hsnoitlaleraidof ngiredro
y, le. fcapseirBtrs he efel evrro cimelto within-structure to unity in al the iccoonstext of ex es lipmtoeis cpsiachroeps
s, ucofel vro cteito he mte l-isi-mnius ehtsicwofnd athe an important et cafof the on itinifedof tal he icosorder.
el vro cameto lte is-neewtebs. ucofch aEls of r-eepvse eehtl ty i2. lihe biTssopof al ittnhe ereffon iital aduilacvosof
ts imee ra geof dcreation g. .e(architectural) nd au-pinam ce ais png an sigthnextremely eeme. lce laaan hcpcbeS
lation g. .e(g) nippamof al itapsng iredrothat an cbe ed tsevnith ial wcirotsiht, hgior ewfe, lpmaxein the rm ofof
ed tceridtoward the ic lobmyson itasitamehcsnd aalitneirepxe ve itaromemmocstructures ed tand icas-osislaaethe alers. T
reinforcement ed sof inal giocceorsg.a niredro ation of ty iliis bhtissopin the attempt icse ifmiitto cigeepls
At the el it vro cimeen lis tfole bissto opak epsof iclbup ms ls aiudaind vof laidcnes iitsanydto the le orof n-eserper
nd ate avirpdomains. gh uohtlAstructures ns oofind saivid es vitatof al tihe coer drosis an important on itaredisnocin
es capin htiwsstructures ed taicossal audith ivwide-sunohi the on italupinamof tal he icoorder. sAnother ct epsaof the
holds an cbin e, ly laiin atrectnerefs, fiedsaced tangiassed al on itiaulcavosof ce ais pthe sal utca’putting into vofalue’
ic lbupnd ate avirprs otng cesiwom org. .e(ardnd aboudoir), nd aled sal thiriot. urngh ocfgfeoocserhe Ton itaercof
it in is the more al us ioicvboin oasmodof ic lbuparchitecture le actransformations s-egraes of ls, ecinolocand aflg..er(us
that the character of al icoa sorder leld uobhsisly higbe vih ng iraof elcs, tserofng iniars, of dpcmonastwrusction of
nd ae. lbihe gTlm elaerof ic lbuparchiteng ctuire tanicinis saf ex lpmon oitcagirrms ietnd syasso on), nd athe creation of
the se netshat it is an attempt at al iton aiptsasinagchroihw markets, or fse iae, lns pomiatxseeurqnot ng ily ndoragetrhe
potentiales ly gh vee ilhroa gvenof idus oicsnocconceptual- on itangisof sathe se nd auts iforpof ch uslands, but sola
isation nd a(thus attendant se ruocnd saidg) ninoitseuqof a ns oitseuqon ve itaitinind aauthority in the creation of chus
al icosorder us oiverto pits transformation into material- ve itnd ve e. ashe uoTlaebvacomments ggincomplre euteas
al itapsss ordeer. lto deeadNd, ic lbupmonuments of exlpmoc rather ve thian tinifedof ns oitaredisnocthat ht gimbe taken
es iteicosic logs bas ve mynng soialwn ppaharmdthe attention into nt uoccaen hng ikoolwat the ic on liotbamsyisnagroof
of s.tsigoloeahcra ce ait pas ses talerto the on itaercnd on aitamitigelalof icosa
At el vro ecne tohe ilm-st iommng ieea sismrorofap er droin htiwex lpmocs.eiteicos
on itagitsevniis the al itapson itasinagroof ex lpmocnd aanbru ng ty iimrolre jeahmean wrhevWoof the traditionally
centres. he Tgh ee irhgeof dan brung innalic tsireptcarahcof ed singocer’characteristics’ of aston ass te iteassinasgroop
certain ly nt raaecisftaily tes hnggiis ihsto an nt emugraof the ry eed krvamcomponent of al al ciiton saiytpahssipnagrog..e(
ng ippamof al icosa er droonto e. capsot Nly nois there the is sang hion spamerecnteirritorial on itasinagroed as soppoto
on isaccoor fthe us oicsnocnd ate arebiledon itasinagroof on iip thasnsiiknagrin othe on itinifedof a polity, u-nom
e, capsis as the se ath icwic lbuparchitecture, but s-inathis gro al tneml-aruchcile tiecratugcre, as-an breugrn, oitaasinaglro
ation of es ce aobpeysond gon itasitamehcsto eegh righa ed tural ), stcejorpthe theme of ton ic he iltoabsmiynsagroof
of actualisation in the al cisynt ehmepgnarraes of itivnditaca ce ald pusowar eppare omly lautpecnoced cnaunnda
ls audividch niihde wivorpthe al itneirepxecounterpart to the ng ignthan ellahcthe traditional ’checklist’ ns oitalumrofof a
conceptualisation nd aon itasilobmysof a paralticular icos on itinifedof the r, setve, ast estuwime. onhgtoWe hceat rif
order. In e, snean brusa ce ais ppostentially ce al aicparopss we ct eridattention es ic to ulbuas psch susiarchitecture,
e.cnellecxe an brun, oitasinagrond aterritorial gs nipicploabas myms
Too en tfoal itapses idutsat ve the el n-aocvhero caml s, gnireng re dwe riokooalat es rutaefof an edifitcejbo
centraly teed visuic lhcpaxon rend goaegic monocelsedom al al iiretcacmoonstext tes hat as vthe recsontext of b-us
ke ralC(197p. 7, ). he 3T1importance of ch usnsoitaredisnoc ve itcce enjeirepxend arepresentation. It iis mportant to
nis ot to be denied, but traditional ethnographic nd ae-ahcra se inger hotrucferthat this is ne ole opof ex lpma ocicmanyd
al ciligtoerlatoure points to al the ng iipcpaomof sce apats of ic lobmnd yasconceptual ng ich rds es-dirosnhewiceifts n
idealand Matters material 55
ry acomplement at the other of nd tehe e,lacs to so k, aeps in ldea if of seral uioccs oids tin he na ly irsratatee eM of the late
the embodiment of ngi naem in ve itcejcebneui respxe nda eighteenth century. An understanding of se ehttsnemele
representatioal n. cigoloienfoes rmis ataionchhcaTrlap thein ld uoly hlsautnevecontribute to an understanding f-l eof sthe
context of a mng oire s sapmotchneeoretical ve itcepsrepthan production of na isocriety. eM
that of ’s edlihCic tamgarponitinifed of al iretamcultural syagalhe TaM nda arcsagada M ofne o re a se ohteslpoep
nsiamer as ’ concrete nsoisserpxe ... of knowledge’ (1956, p. se nd es oacnamhe, awlthoupgh r,ailexigs otminc, aifr but
1); ait is th eoretical ve itcepsrepch ieshdulwcerp nya lepmis alcihparse gooehgw nda al cigolonhte er tcarahcnsiamer
opposition or id entity of matters aliretam nda isideahl. T ly gft inrdaime. reeevhewiemSsosule thein an id nIn,aecO neo
theoretical on itcelferdsael to ng iyfil aksuramqer ton he s-id sy apgoeatlaM 10 ash edllac ish nd alemoh Tile au b out du
onissuc to w.ollof monde’. anis It nd alsith at ash ed refgefouf er as lyisae theto
al he Ticosorder of r)a cal rtsneCna aigreamIdaM( st oltribe of ela rsI tto he as st ol estamirp of cair fA (the
ngirud the thneetf if to the n ineteenth es irutnecesdivoAD rp lemurs). Unfortunately, the limitations theon nt ese rprkow
ic fica epscultural context in ch i hwinatrec of es uthe ssi s-id do not owll a a ve isneheirnptmrocodu ction to the ’sdnalsi
ed ssuve cobanginrecnoc the ic onliobtmayssin agro of ceap s history nda po pulation. heT interested er daelylraitiis ni
nda the legitimation of a al citilop-oicoser dr ohtgim be edrrefer to the ic ksrsowsalc of er idi dnarG(1892), auuodnaD
examined. ng irutDhis od irepal rtneedCna sisreemnItiw an us pah(C1& 952), nd a ps mah(c1s9e7 D2).
ng isaercncionceptual onitacificeps of a i-fial citilnal opedgi is wsolat lhoWf ais ef irb introductory chteks of ne oeara
cantly edtsefinam tin he al ingcipopasm nda onitaulav of of the nd alsithat aw tshe seir of an us onegidniexlpmo c
e.caps beIt an c ed ugra that an inti mate iet en ewteb ndal nda al citiln.ooitpasi-nagoroicos heT ds nal rtnecaealrhga ih ash
polity asw central to the onitamitigel of the o-ina cosire M en tfoedren reefber theto as ’hauts-plateaux’, but ch us a
political order. heT or jceanmed ive orf this ntemugra is onitpircsed is inadequate tto he efle bairedlisneoc r in isht
ed naeom lrgfdsal cligoeloeidif of representation; the alro
e,vissely rlpmaief uislia. eeis rvarhis T as llew as lylacigoloeg
tradition thend a ic lonoibtmays sinagro of e. cus ahTps the
interesting. reehT rea ed srneumeprous srels tnil ihth iwerhgih
on issucwssch iiohdwllof not ais ll uf chteks of the csi manyd
mountains of ic nn. iaregcierhloTov rea ysed edils-lpaeevts
of an order of representation annd a erdr o of tyivi tca in
nd aneirtsucal nda al is.vnialuplla t heIn al rtnec eara of
al rtneCImerina. chuS a sketch st umit awaer htrufe-ahcra
nairemI g. if( ),1 the oniger of particular interest to this
alcigolo nda historical n.oitagitsevni heT onng iiswsoulclsoifd
study, nt ecerngitluaf nda ft ilpu ngola the rn etsgee wde of
is rather an initial attempt to se iret carahcin atrectsnemele of
the eara ash edkcolb the owlf of rsevi r nd a edtaerc a stav
senapxe of eskal nda hy sram s.nialp heT tradition al reoc of
Fig. 1. Early states r.acin sagadaM na irerestrimctedas Iw to an eara of about km30 usidar
nd uoravoirananatnA 2).g. if( on edisgseis ernhtTiw
0(cid:176) 4 5(cid:176)4
us onegidni’state(s)’ nt empolre eveedhwemoeneswteb the
(cid:151) 0(cid:176)1 a.niremIal rtneC2. g. iF
Ambohidratrimo ganamihobmA
’-.. Ambohitrabiby
— 20°
(cid:151) 5(cid:176)2
200 km
Susan Kus 56
sixteenth nd athe eighteenth centuries gh uohT(D. Aisht ng hiunltelrs ewnd das, rein rehtagothers they re areputed to
is not the ly noea raon tnd he alsied sto seve natihwexlpmoc s, rehbe sciattfle rs edrehnd aam edygs. rdhe eeTwlowrognkca
al icosdevelopment. g. ee ifS.)1 rs otsecnaof ta, he nthe iid a, rre eavaMosto ve Hahentered
ng irtuDhe gn ierof the ly lacirotsihed nwonerer ifinuof na ireom mIrfthe south. ey hTly desoppusst rifed ipuccothe
Imerina, Andrianampoinimerina (1787-1810), l-ucthe irga es na taivsaof ogannd aana, naisaknFarardnAthen ngivom
tural se abof tna he istrate eMas bowth rich nd acomplex. er solto cve ivo irananastnAoccupatisons tehrough cofcus
he Tin amle patsas et wwrice. he Tce nednepedon is htoprc ka ajnamiremra g. Iee nd oassia(lgh fge uoaA2r). hiTndrraam
toly dgay nimleus howiis rvbeto ovoter vhe al rofuessaboc re afrawba the mied re bzreoasbwaVed calor psby idthe ewn
the na ircouentryMside it as us oas ivto bwothe h-tneethgie s. a, he led bTamvsiid izho rsawrre aVaaesslyto nsove oaph
nd anineteenth-century or tisivto a. niremIot Nly noid dthe ay lcps itor ftheir rs and eapsto ve en aebhly lacs-itilopid
rich il osof ey tlhe rs loaed olter vfafgfind arlori-or llfecewir parate, re eno wch tamor fthe va ed ioho rwracHonri
cultivation ly ch iihswaas put ewinleto acscrop -llth iwams ns opaend watds he eeof sstatesmanship.
terracing, but es ireof sa or jamge ants ciejoarprdinitiated or an gal va che eitTiblto oop-ow oveiiHthacitioniss
expanded under the es cipsuof aa,nireminiopmanairdnA ng irns utdghe iof erthe ns eeta uqignand Rahy ofaRhow
ng ivltroavcnts iof nd alhsramin a, niremIbrought into i-tluc ed ngka iaejnraat miremI(approximately ly raesixteenth n-ec
vation ge ralama ount of additional e-paddy grase a. leerahT tury ta i). gDAnais ed tiderRcng th iiwgordner irbto alcitilop
le on itagiraricsprojects, es ding insepeoup bew nd nalto le urng omathe ed va en tahnohe gwissHean dorder of
cultivation, ed wollathe ty ilibissopof nd ocesa nd a(in meos on isce seicto cfusfothus ng itaercty tihe libissopof alcitilop
s,esac en vea third) planting of rice ch aer. aeng yidroccAto unity nd acontinuity. ed ssahe the pSns ice erof iffoto erh
the r, ehpargoegon siaR(1972) nd aothers, ictthe siugnil st edleson, o, lenamairdnAnd aer htrufed tacidnithat ashe w
ce nedivepoints to late a introduction of the techniques orf to ed deecbe cusby er is gnuoyhbrother, Andriamanitany.
le acson itavitluc-ethe gralof et wce irinto the au etalpa,era gn io, lenamse ais ierdnAotrradihtionwally ed calinp
though ry drice cultivation nd athe on itavitlucof et rice win the sixteenth century, as the st wrifna aedicrdnnAedas i(ve
hy sramas eray ave mahen ebed sitcarpr. eilraene ht gOisomla by is e) manhor le bonin rm ong fImeriina, tvhus to igthe
note that ch taro, ies hmed itwremis orseferto in the alro al citilohy crapreih-oicosic tsiretcarahcof na tihe srtatee.M
traditions tas he al niod goifroce ruosof a, the ldnuoiwreM he Trm etly tneuqva esbusas owed Hsute to angisethe dm-oc
ve ahen ely bisaed taviteas lucin ey rs ltohe loalfvnd ahysram er nom’cl’s aoslse’. nns amairdnofgAng iiednd reaeccus
s.aera le ba at al lce cingihe oeTlaodeaiprevsent hcvareaon the us na aoirided nrsAiarevre tcaarahcin the literature by
st eilraesettlements in na irews mIch oues hstsilocated sas on ed trossaal iretamnd aal citiloinnovations pin a continued
ng ise kys noaaridges llwto fcl-waoyslethy er he lslrllaaammvs nd aconcerted sh upds rawotal citilopn.oitacifinu
le aal edciet sw-or ce lfilraor mstub&er ht gon itavitluicrW(
na ireminioed pmadnarirdanAgeris by tradition as the
us K1980).
at ergor tacifinuof na tsihe tarte. eMIt interis esting to note
es tey dhe lior les sodso re aelilfevBsawlplutis, aerha that the st ilof ns oitavonnied tidercto is hter lurds ake aielr
into cultivation. ng idroccAto n, osiace Rnthe edpioinvts eto st ilkcehcof state institutions wn aom rdrfic satnshe tharo-lc
a practice ’d’une se ure uetlucirgante et gnisaavoassa al con iitginoifleodpof the state. ey hTde ulcnich usnsrecnoc
maniere’ (1972, p. 417). us ohe iTrps oed atracvvitlucl-lon ih tas axation, permanent ry atilimee n, oitvasinagrorolcabour,
es de ped dulcniiolssroots nd atubers ch usas manioc, population ts nemecalpsnd idaon itasinolocof ngidnuorrus
potatoes, et ewspotatoes nd as.emuyamgs, nd eus laoirav s,aera n ot to mention or jon iatagirrmis. tcejorpon pUthe
y, lsuoivtbhe Oer nifns oitseuqof introductions, techniques death of a, nireminiopmanairdnAth iwthe on itpmussaof
nd aes sait hapmweapalaeo-ethnobotanic alcnd igaoloeahcra er wopby is son, hma adaRI, than ere gin eb10 81the odirep
study. of or jaman ece pnoreuuElfniin ds tnhe alnd hagihthe n-apxe
al rtOraditions nd aethnohistorical etts nuoccallg. .ae(C on isof na tre iihe pmerto eiMncorporate two-thirds of the
1974;Deschamps us pau uoadn1aD9h7C2; & 1952;Boiteau d.nalsi
1958; rd ansI 3) 591present ve ian snetxsketch enaiof reM le he bTaust omlavnidocumentle ary balonce iruaosva
ws eof ivtheir proper history in the eighteenth nd ae-nin na icultural rehistoMry is the ur ofes motof the Tantaran’ny
teenth cse entuiriers. ailTo itmhe afer daerth iwsstohe rg Rois). des Andriana (Histoire heT Tantara re aal rotraditions
outlines of this history, ng itwhe oef lirlbry oamfmusis ed tcellocge aund agby sy ned drocaerlathe gin aittushe eJlaM
d.ereffo y, rt, are neoen ileeswlstiaemPbC68 81nd a’s1t8e8l3. laC
na ihe Tid re raase eisnto Mgocthree erds oirepof their sy rs infoermants daho lwed ead hsgseed dnaultcniilwtheaM
history: fony ny vazimba tany or the od irepen hwlyhtrae al nifys adof gn the ierof a. nireminiopmanairdnAet Yseeht
er wopld eas hwby the a, bmizfanjakana tahova Vhe or traditions er fernot ly noto the ts neveof is htperiod, but to
nt emnrevogby the va nd aoHna tihe ). s(modgnikrheTeM the entirety na iof history reed siMlautpecnas ocby seeht
ry adneal genligirobianhabitants of na ired elmIlre aacthe al colinhabitants. is information hTes divan orpimportant
a. bmizaVIn me osaccounts they id are asto be t-serof nt emelpmocon ital agciitsgein voniloto eaalhrctrneaC
idealand Matters material 57
na iremIor fthese traditions permit er nng iia nfoofisnemid ed ifly igcniespnd aeasrces nmioprecdomeinabnt in the
conceptual es uat ssiay lna ps-iin al rutlucioicosrnaegrMo Tantara nd ads niits fon itasilautcain the ts nemhsilpmoccaof
ation. a. nireminiopmanairdnAhe al Tcital ileodpiof fanjakana esod
heT Tantara as hrecently en ebthe ct ejbusof nta aillirb not le ly ppmimsitatic sa ce nanetniamof order, but rather a
sociocultural is syre lav(by nia19l7e4D), is chsiyan hlwana ic manle ypdicnirpof the creation of al orcder, itcin elaiitsd
es obegyond the traditional gs nidaeof rthe al rotraditions of on itacilpmiof both continuity (tradition) nd aalnoitcerid
al tcihe rotsihas -isch tea ksaungqiTantara vlof ovts nneive es soppuse: genahrchia sptory ’fanjakana nd an’oa issergorp
the central dynasty of na t’s he eim. rk odrgniokvriswieleMD my (translation re vof ile4, 7D91p. ).161
an attempt to understand en na vby tihe se iof rnegesMthe Continuity al citint is a recmelein na tihe rptecnoceM
nineteenth century to their wn ohistory. er hsetehnWis htes of history as ed noitneme. vobaIt nis oa tion ed itto concepts
of history an cly etambe itigeled tcejorpck abto erilrae of om tsucg..e( didin-drazana ng iyfinaw gli’of sthe ancestors’)
ds oirepis moot, but en vif erestricted to nineteenth-century nd ataboo (fady) an vep nne(G4, 09p. 1icssa). 6he 21Tlc
a, nire’s mIerts vnemuigraleDre aimportant or fthe r-obale study of om tsucnd ataboo sas tructuring ts nemelein
ation of the theme of the on itamitigelalof citilopa -oicos sy ty eicaosgtis he ark olwaof Man ep nvneGon Tabou et
order in al rtneCImerina. Totemisme d Madagascar. gh uohTes this mrk tuohwsat sathe
heT Tantara ng itaniis csaa fdocument in that it is al iinsctitoutsions of om tsucnd ataboo an cbe st omc-effe
ed sinagroth iwer taergcomplexity than le on iptcelmlocisa of ly evited idutsat el vthe eof r)laca cultural saea graa(id.e. aM
in gs, ierigoomlayetnehgs, lk ofes latnd aal cs.irootsiihranecs rather than at anel al cvivtts, he ginleof ioppul-oorigcos
It re vas he, is ilbissoplas deemonDstrated, to ad erthe ns oitasi’s re penneGlaarneot negwithout ue in lngiarevdisnoc
as sa tructuTantara red al citise lropu-ooiccossion dthe na irsociety.eM
creation of al icnd oa asal citiloper droin naia. nirremIeM om tsuCnd ataboo al ee tniaraucty ilibatsgosnd ainte-
history is not ly pmised ipuccoerpng idnd rth aiawgn-eirmaxe gran ation. ep vnneGAs points out, en hwly lautpecnocnda
al cng iigtohe lty ilibidercaenegus of oirparetevnders to i-tilop ly laitneirepxethe ry amotsucnd athe habitual ve enaebh
al cpower. It is a history ed ipuccoerpth iwthe ry evconcept ed tsevnith iwthe ee tnaraugof stability nd aorder, it wsollof
of ’history’ en esal on citas ircia snemiin dthe on itaercnda ly lactihgoat lthe al mronband athe extraordinary ar eppaas
on ituloveof al icre od, as a esvuhgorrder. aitlheeAs D ts nemeleof instability nd ar, edrosidnd athus s.uoas regnad
Tantara ks aepsof an ’intimate relation en ewtebalcita ilop or Fthe nt en, seorpissucthe sidre omal citircre utaefof a
al edind on aisiva of history thes at vas concrerte esel domof concepld tual eifthat surrounds noa tion al of icom tsuocsin
this ideal’ my (translation re vof ileD4, 791p. ). ry61o1tsiH ar cis not sagathe dacontMrast of the al mronbabut, rather,
as nwot ly pmista emporal on isnemidor fit asthe a; nwireM ma the ginof ethe an w. ep ed: nenvnseiGnAs gocerLa’
a ic manydle picnirpthat ed knilthe st apto the nt eserpin the notion de nouveau n’est qu’une ce naunde la notion
se nesof an ng idlofnuof al citila opal edithrough alicos d’anormal’ as (ns i1ewt9nd 0r4, ans eekcp. ihh3c7). Wthat
praxis. ow ke rilcrs etsoored an scnebe psth iiwdif nd uofthreaten-
he Tconcept of fanjakana is al rtnecto an d-natsrednu g, nithe ng idliubof ew nse a uohnd athe undertaking of a
ng iof the al citilopal edina of isocriety.eM Fanjakana ash ew nct ejorpre is omin prohblemattic. iis htWconceptual
en ebtraditionally translated om dgnikas (royaume) in the ld eifnoa tion of ge nand hacty levonve lst oumvtheni
ethnographic literature, but the ld ic tnameesifof is htrm etis interpretation nd alimitations of ch usns recnocas innovation,
ly baredisnocre omex lpmocthan the rd ow’kingdom’ esilpmi s, eval ind cies ttiaalogupmeoorcsere erch bpshuisestiory. hW
re vileD(4, 791p. ). 951he Trecurrent on isserpnd xeuofin the st omal citircnd ast omit cilpna xety eiiin cosris in eMthe
Tantara, ny tany sy ny fanjakana (’the nd alnd ag-the nik ns oitcals aung idypial ual of vcitcioocvdiopnospitions,is
dom’), ws arda tight on itaicossaen ewtebterritory nda re y, loemsin iceal rpudithe vidniof the ng idnng atsikat the
government. re s, vetuhe gt, reial Yaon itilaspas sneeismDid ex paof al ithe cor. edrosus ihe nTof egna ithe tyeicroseM
not the ly noon isnemidal citircto ngidnatsrednu fanjakana as es in ilpe the acsof eon al isuclcntiohe cgoof lin-gnthe immeh
a concept, there is a temporal on isnemidl, ltas he ewn-emid of the ns oitcaof the ng ithrough kid the ginotirons of alutir
on isof history (1974, pp. 159-61). nd ary asanctity sseceto nng iniatniaman ic rotsihaorder.
na ty eiciosInstead, red taerobaleMic ma anydnotion of n-oc
he Tna iremIst apis understood ic tnagalrutliuas ca g
tinuity ch ed ietnharawuger drothrough al noitceride.gnahc
history, re ehwthe nt eserply lty eiacosudas ahrgnduof
na ied tarobalhe erTeMat hwin t, cs, ieffean ryanoitulove
its ry alpmexels edomnd aits de omof g,ninoitcnuf
le picnirpof the on itaercal of icen at oorder. hvsis reoWme
thanks to al yorve itaitinind ato it alose ne: uacebthere
ng itanicin safthe on itarobaleof is htic manydconcept of
ed tsixenothing at ng tihe nnbiut gebos ahcnd athe
history is that as ed egrtrehe ahhis wng th iiwckthe n-oc
ce nesbaof fanjakana.
ry on iatasilautpsecseceto nal cirotsiht, nemevomthe le orof
my (translation re vof ileD4, 791p. 7)61
ed sinty egicoin osceris the on itasilautcaof history.
he Trm etfanjakana is both a structure alciof tilop-oicos
order nd aa al citilopideal, an al ediof on itacifinuchihw or Fna tithe he reon itaercMof al citiloper droedkovni
Susan Kus 58
a notion of al icos’contract’. ne Oof the st omngikirts interpretations of nt ereffidts cepsaof em this tsysy. ravheT
es lpmaxeof this theme is na the irce itcarpeMof almrof ns ed otsempoiural in sivthe ins doitaluclacof vintana ingeb
public e. sruocsidhe Troyal kabary ly gnitseretni(h,guone on ith siwiof va idthe ar eyinve to lewmtonths, the ekew
id asnot to ve aen hebwn onkto the a) bmiis zaan Vsserdda inen to vnd eas, yadsthe ay dinto ht gie-ytnewtperiods.
by the er lurto is hply eloapelde, itaking the rm ofof a g. iF(ts n3 eserpthe on mmocnt emegnarraof the velewt
ue golaidnd aly laedia prerequisite to the ng ikamof orjam vintana of the year.) ch aEmonth as hcharactea ristic nyitsed
cy ilopns oisicedon ar wnd aic lbups, krowthe institution of ed taicossath iwit. st he TrifdeAlahamady stiny, in the north-
ew ns, wand latng ihe yval of eilceptasxes. 11 In reality, the st aecorner, or fed redisnexais mple, ocle bona i-cod iorepssa
kabary as en tfowthe presentation of a fait accompli to the ed tath iwthe g, nor ikfit Alahamady is ’that ds roccatyingid
populace. s, selehttrhe eveNal yorkabary traditionally angeb ty ngnd iearevnd oasthanks to ch ihll an wcabe undertaken’
th iwch usstatements as ’It is not I ho wcommand, it weis my (translation et of llaCme u4, 7l91oVp. 1, Adalo, 54). on
ho wcommand, you nd amy (V translation re vof ile4,791D the other hand, is ny ed ittsa edaicossath iwrs aetnda
p. 60), or ’It is to the le poepthat the ht giis es ng rhiwkoto unhappiness. he Tinterplay of the es initsedof the months,
n, rse euvaocegbif it is the se tahcat attds he elregng iikw s,yad ns o ind of saivithe dle baay rds edddaisnoctyixelpmoc
er wopin is hposition n, git ierso elis voatas she se atchat the of on italuclacnd asubtlety of interpretation to is htemtsys
people ld ohat erger wopas the people’ my (translation of ch ds inhiwll fits ufexploitation in the ds nahs,tof silaiceps
Dandouau us pahC& 1952, p. ).441 the mpanandro.
es ushe sTof ihistory nd athe creation of al citiloperdro nt acifhe Tinve rs ebmunlgn, end iewto asvtesthe
through al icoaction sed diugby royal es aluciinittsiiartcisve, i temporal er droin al rtneCa, nso iremIar leppaain ritual
to the ’naturalisation of society’ al ie,na scruooin icssidreM s. ns oitancovnioiFor nd sal aiivcie, lopmaxedsenthere vere as
an cso labe en ein sus oits creapsvaof al itapsnd atemporal lebon (andriana) ps uoin rgal na ihy crareihcithe osrndeaM
ng iredroin al rtneCna iremIus K(1979). ne Ost omngikirts there en val yorre eastombs at the al tipacof Antananarivo.
le pmaxein is the reconstruction of the ed rcasal tipacof re ehve ed Trlve rocyeal re lawaestws, namsitlatmountains,
ga namihobmAg. ee si(f2) under na ireminiopmanairdnAertfa gs ve nlieof wktna iremInd ana ireminiopmanairdnAadh
on itais cifhicapof al rtneCa. niremIhe Treconstruction of he ve ng Ts. lipeal yeoprwatvmof iwthis temporal order onto
ga namihobmAiis nteresting in that there rs aeppato be an the on al iitnt aspesndeimvis iein dboth gease uohlnd laiv
interplay, rather than an ela cseparation, en ewtebo-msoa c layout. It imis portant to note that ge in rnuamber la esof sac
al cigong ireldrond aa political g. niredrois hay Tmen be eins re ehwthe en number is vece mployed, nereefersis de amto
the double internal al itapson itasinagroof the is sithe. Tinter- al cigodlepth on aietnaend iglaiffaor al to icohsierarchy.
ay lpld uowem esto be in ce nadroccath iwthe ntemugra ed er htOtras s, he ve celsaaescmowuntains tve lor ewtroyal
presented er ilraethat it is the particular al cice tcneallaaidbof
the on itasilaicos’of nature’ nd athe ’naturalisation of society’
that constitutes ta hematic us cofin htiwthe er droof e-rper
sentation en in vex lpmocia gsociety. Alohotsy
ht gieis ps Hahrepthe st omus al oitiavpbsoonisnemid Alahamady
to st evnith ial wie, cnd uloaasv’s aniremIch irtopography of
ls ys liend as halnot lwaved ronging idroccato the Tantara. A
central nd aed taveleposition ly lacilobmyas sed talerwto
al icohierasrchy ng idroccato tradition. a, gnamihongbmAola
th iwother ed taes itciosssath iwnoble or al yore,cnediser
las ocated won ed ifita rofhilltop. t, eYthe re ominteresting
ts cepsaof al itapsng iredrong inrecnocthe es soprupof isht Adaoro
Alakaosy
paper re ed asabon two or jangng iimms kpeoptvasnlyirsevo
rt apa -evlewtnd art apa -ruofon isivof idthe ar nalpe.cafrus
rt apon -he eTvilewin sts, iivt, ciafdto be understood as
the al itapsng ippamof a temporal g. niredroVintana is the
sy agconcept alaof Mdestiny. ry asIt seceis to nssethe ccus Alakarabo Adizaoza
of al udividnind aal icosundertakings to take into account the
es crofof destiny; to in geew nba undertaking on an kyculnu
ay dll ily nowlt userin er tsasidor e. rulil,as, llfaeuas dwividnI
ng idroccato the time of their chss ihbewivintana srtshs, op
ll iwdetermine the or jamcharacter ss eof nd re caucluiinsaf
em ttsyhseir A s. evilal of cigolorton sitaaluclac(with r-efer
ce neto the un snd athe on omin on isulcxeof st omother Adimizana Asorotany
al itselecs) eidobis on mmocto tnd he alsias e, a lohwbut
Asombola Alahasaty
idealMatters and material 59
em talismeans, sto ke ce anmereferto al ma irporder or ps al y, er sunotmioofarcha(ig.e. miosTshyalohobmaimisT
g. nipuorgre r, ehTevnd ewoocihes, sa er droof lebissop ly o) ltnd aaavnaed ikiho cgawdbinraoMn-iopmanairdnA
al itapspartitioning ed yolpmein na iremIthat is lytrevo na iremiim in ais lhto cthe throne ga nof amihond bmaAin
al citilopin ies ts cnereferto an al ediof al citilopn.oitacifinu al uve tis nehiverto dunite a.niremI
ce nache Tifiic lobmysnof gisthe ur ofal nidc-reacrid he Ttwo ms etsysof n, oal iitrtatsphe asipv-eivdlewt
tions nd athe centre point es mitemos(translated into the al em citgsoylsortnd saathe ur ofal nidracns oitceridus lpthe
relationship en ewtebur ofrs enrocnd athe centre) in the centre, re e, lbasopmairepusnd athis ct afis not without
na iroreder Mof representation cannot d. essechbe rtasreEvo import or fthe structural layout of the al tipacof i-hobmA
et sof ng isoppoed vidirecetions cnois cas a contrast of a. gnamentiAs oned men e, vhobawthe centre of na irasemIw
qualities. he TNorth is the noble on itceridle ithhe wth uoSis d, eifina cireaminpiopmanairdnAundertook the reconstruc-
ly wolor humble. he Ted st readised Eis norccasstnd aethe W tion ve of isnthe ees hcftidnd eadin aes tmaof gedthe rcas
profane. It is the centre, as on inund ace nadnecsnartas of al tipacon of a. ginamsihohe ibal TmAof vicliabour odsin
the ur ofdirections, that represents the al al citeilopdiof se ehtks satnd athe al itapslayout of al yor(the rova quarters),
unification. he Tstory na olavaniof samais itrhe dnAe-rp town, ed es hcstidsnd in aues re ctaastghe idetTantara llaC(
eminent al citiloptale of the It n-isaas maTantara. irwdnA me 4, 79u1loV2, pp. 278-323). he nt Temtsevnialof icos
na olavly alho awnigirobrought on itacifinuto a, niremIbut it labour nd aal ion ittaaprsugifnocue isth iwic llobamysv
na olavaniso salmas aairdwnAho won brought isnd iar-viadw us oivbupon ong idaerthe on itpircsedin the Tantara. heT
re ain fagto ana iremIby partitioning the n-om dggnikind sasa construction of or en jtvhe aees mtsaof gthe town asw
ng ch iaeof is hur ofns osto ve itartsinimdats sopwithout ed ngto issthe athree or japs muorgof the no ardaravActirtsid
ng itangisene odir ehas to the united m. odgnikerdnU y, st(i.oe. fahamihy saTlohobmaimisTo) tngnd aovalaaidnaM
Andrianampoinimerina na iremIattained ce nore omthe th iwthe other al ps iuocrgoof som na eddgtdinhe iikrviedM
political al ediof on itacifinuin the on itacifinuerof the urof into three units ng idrocce cnto aedisin erthe three additional
al nigirodistricts of Imerina: a,no, naradartavAavoraM ts cirtsidof al nyrotna naeisCra, iensmaiItna(iiv.e. okraaVM
Amibodirano, ny ond aasg. isee i4insik).(afV nd aAmbodirano). ng on itiatIn nshe giisof vedidlabour nda
he TNortheast direction is the st omhonoured c-erid the al utnens voeitcnufed to vrbe by es,en estagvse ehtes
tion it as es nibmocthe character of the le bonnd athe d.ercas na ireminiopmanairdnAce nede raefmerto the ur ofalnidrac
Appropriately enough, the al ls uatdipacof na iremIunder directions. us hTthy he alohobmaimisTre eto wig the dchtid
Andrianampoinimerina, ga namihobmAnd ao,virananatnA nd ald iubthe te agof na agastimotabmAat the e-t. sraEroC
re alocated in the northeast ct irtsidof o. nardaravAedtacoL ed ngy, lgnito dniopto sra astavre he osbaemiAawdnat aMthe
in the ct irtsidof no ardaravAre aso ltahe three or jan-mroc North, sy totfahe hamisTto na akadnAat t, tshe theeW
ny na iahtaavto avto rodrnynat, oaMattihe sshe iMesiWnikaV
to na arahastipmAat the th uoSnd athe st aEnd athe
a.natavoraM2: o. nardaravA1: a. niremof Its cirtsidhe T4. g. iF
no aridobmAto Andranomatsatso at the th ug. oSif(5). In
o.gnozninoV5: y. noasisinikaV4: o. naridobm3: A
o.mamIa. 7: rtaraknanika6: V
maalastnifazae: cRruoSa. gnamihobmAof ts cirtsidhe T5. g. iF
Ankazobe 3.791
5 ’(cid:149) \
Ma naniera
-•j • Ambohimanga
\ 1 v
/ •Antisirabe .^ j.
• Ambositra