In the [next chapter] I pass, therefore, to the preliminary stages of the Kula, in the Trobriands, beginning with a description of the canoes.
[1] By “current view,” I mean such as is to be found in text-books and in passing remarks, scattered through economic and ethnological literature. As a matter of fact, Economics is a subject very seldom touched upon either in theoretical works on Ethnology, or in accounts of field-work. I have enlarged on this deficiency in the article on “Primitive Economics,” published in the Economic Journal, March, 1921.
The best analysis of the problem of savage economy is to be found, in spite of its many shortcomings, in K. Bücher’s “Industrial Evolution,” English Translation, 1901. on primitive trade, however, his views are inadequate. In accordance with his general view that savages have no national economy, he maintains that any spread of goods among natives is achieved by non-economic means, such as robbery, tributes and gifts. The information contained in the present volume is incompatible with Bücher’s views, nor could he have maintained them had he been acquainted with Barton’s description of the Hiri (contained in Seligman’s “Melanesians.”)
A summary of the research done on Primitive Economics, showing incidentally, how little real, sound work has been accomplished, will be found in Pater W. Kopper’s “Die Ethnologische Wirtschaftsforschung” in Anthropos, X—XI, 1915–16, pp. 611–651, and 971–1079. The article is very useful, where the author summarises the views of others. [↑]
[2] Professor C. G. Seligman, op. cit., p. 93, states that arm-shells toea, as they are called by the Motu, are traded from the Port Moresby district westward to the Gulf of Papua. Among the Motu and Koita, near Port Moresby, they are highly valued, and nowadays attain very high prices, up to £30, much more than is paid for the same article among the Massim. [↑]
[3] This and the following quotations are from the Author’s preliminary article on the Kula in Man, July, 1920. Article number 51, p. 100. [↑]
[4] In order not to be guilty of inconsistency in using loosely the word “ceremonial” I shall define it briefly. I shall call an action ceremonial, if it is (1) public; (2) carried on under observance of definite formalities; (3) if it has sociological, religious, or magical import, and carries with it obligations. [↑]
[5] This is not a fanciful construction of what an erroneous opinion might be, for I could give actual examples proving that such opinions have been set forth, but as I am not giving here a criticism of existing theories of Primitive Economics, I do not want to overload this chapter with quotations. [↑]
[6] It is hardly necessary perhaps to make it quite clear that all questions of origins, of development or history of the institutions have been rigorously ruled out of this work. The mixing up of speculative or hypothetical views with an account of facts is, in my opinion an unpardonable sin against ethnographic method. [↑]