In overall sense, the weaker
status of women surpasses all societies. The reason behind, is most of the
valued goods and services outside the family are controlled by men. But,
horticulture, which is both a mode of production and a form of cultural
practice, acts as a tool for women to enjoy comparatively higher statuses in
many ethnic societies. Both culture and horticulture are closely related with
some ethnic people’s socio-economic condition. Therefore, it is obvious any
shift from horticulture to agriculture will affect those cultural practices
that provide higher statuses for women. The purpose of this article is to prove
that women’s status will be affected as much as horticulture will be affect by
intensive or commercial agriculture.
Before, going to explain my thesis
further, I would like to explain how horticulture is related to culture and
status of women in three different ethnic groups, who live in different
geographic positions. They differ in many respects, but at the same time, have
many similarities in culture and practices in one or other way. Now let me
explain the economy and culture of each of the three ethnic groups one by one.
Use of money is prevalent in
Kapauku economy. Cowrie shells and two types of necklaces are used both as
money for purchase and exchange and as a measure of value and worth
(Peters-Golden 2002b: 140). But, the “[p]ositions of leadership in Kapauku
society are held exclusively by men, who appropriate the products of women’s
labor in order to play their political games (Peters-Golden 2002b: 143).” Women
take important decisions in Kapauku society only in few occasions, and even if
a woman individually “makes the important decisions in the family, she never
forgets the conventions of Kapauku culture (Peters-Golden 2002b: 143).”
But, the two wheels of Kapauku
economy are sweet potatoes and pigs. That’s why the Kapaukus largely cultivated
different types of crops but sweet potato takes the main preference.
Again the production of sweet potatoes is closely related to their
culture. “So, indirectly, sweet potatoes not only feed human and animal
alike, but also provide a way to achieve political power (Peters-Golden 2002b:
138).” The education of Kapauku boys and girls begins in the setting of the
horticulture garden. Early on, boys and girls are given gardens or sections of
a garden to care for on their own. A girl plants, weeds, and harvests her own
plot, which is separated from those of her mother and older sisters. This
allows her success or failure to be plainly seen on its own merit
(Peters-Golden 2002b: 147). From the above discussion, we see that cultivation
of sweet potatoes gave women a comparatively higher status. If this culture of
sweet potato was absent in Kapauku culture, women would have no status at all.
Now let us analyze the Trobriand
economy and culture. “There are two types of shells used in the exchange, white
armshells (mwali) and red shell necklaces (bagi) (Peters-Golden
2002c: 248).” Kapauku’s daily life revolves around the yam horticulture. Same
as we modern folks, the Kapaukus can purchase anything they like or need.
Moreover, yams both provide nourishment and riches to them. But, men are mainly
involved with growing yam plants and producing yam. Although some women have
their yam gardens, yet these yams never enter into the formal exchange. Their
culture provides limited access for women in this the field. From this one may
think that Trobriand women have no status in their society. But, Trobriand
culture provided women with two kinds of valuable wealth (Peters-Golden 2002c:
240).
Skirts and “bundles” made of
banana leaves that are used by all Trobriand people and those are exclusively
produced and controlled by Trobriand women. These are important to the
Trobriand economy, and are intricately tied to other forces – chief among them
yams and the matrilineages – in Trobriand culture. Women deal in skirts and
bundles, as currency, throughout the year. Women make skirts and bundles
from the leaves of banana trees, which they own. They inherit trees from their
mothers and sisters, and often men plant banana trees for their wives,
expressly for the purpose of creating her wealth. Men are dependent upon such
wealth (Peters-Golden 2002c: 249 -250). Again taro gardens are planted by all
Trobriand men and women, and food gardens, grown by women, yield all the rest
of the Trobriand diet. Such practices in the culture of Trobriand provided such
a higher status for women that matriline identity is prevalent in their
society. Through the gardening of yams, the matriline’s identity continues
through time in their culture. However, the responsibility to see that children
are fed and clothed and have all they need rests squarely on the shoulders of
their fathers (Peters-Golden 2002c: 240-242). Thus Trobriand women enjoyed both
higher status and power because of this culture.
It is almost impossible to
overstate the importance of Yams in Trobriand culture. They are social
signifiers of the highest order. Men Expend tremendous efforts in their
making of yam gardens. It is hard and nearly constant work. Yet this work is
not for themselves; it is all directed toward others. Men grow yams to give to
women. Yams and taro and pork are roasted and distributed. This entire exchange
is a public presentation of the relationship between the two men, gardener and
owner’s husband. They are linked by the woman who owns the yams (Peters-Golden 2002c:
240).
“Women’s wealth is connected to
yam production in several ways (Peters-Golden 2002c: 250).” “Women’s wealth, in
bundles, is an economic force in modern Trobriand life (Peters-Golden 2002c:
251).” This force is so powerful that now is a serious question why “Women’s
wealth has not diminished in importance over the past one hundred years” Joshua
a Trobriand young man who studied abroad is fed up with this ascribed status
for women in Trobriand culture (Peters-Golden 2002c: 251). Moreover, according
to Weiner, the fundamental importance of women’s wealth as playing a central
role in the Trobriand culture which gave women a very high status
(Peters-Golden 2002c: 253). Again yam is closely associated with Trobriand
culture throughout their life.
Yams and marriage are
significantly linked. A couple declares that they are married by eating yams
together, and after the first year of the marriage has passed, a woman’s father
begins a garden for her; which he will plant yearly. Her brother will eventually
take over this obligation. .. he [wife’s brother] have to build a yam house to
store them in (Peters-Golden 2002c: 240). Each woman of Trobriand had a yam
house. And, only the women can have a yam house. “No man – not even a chief –
can build a yam house for himself (Peters-Golden 2002c: 246).” This
horticulture type culture of Trobriand people such as Yam garden and banana
garden gave women a higher and powerful status.
Now let us analyze the culture and
economy of Aztec people. “The people referred to as Aztecs called themselves
Mexica (Peters-Golden 2002a: 18)” The Aztecs society was much more stratified
and complex than those of Kapauku and Trobriand. The average Mexica devoted
themselves to the construction of temples and houses and chinampas cultivation.
The latter [chinampas] was of crucial importance, not only because
filling their own subsistence needs afforded the Mexica some degree of
autonomy, but also because it was a key to necessary expansion. The Aztec
empire was built on agriculture, and at the core of this agriculture was maize
(Peters-Golden 2002a: 20) Its [maize’s] centrality in subsistence earned maize
a glorified position in Aztec culture. Hardly a mere foodstuff, it was
intimately involved in Mexica daily life. (Peters-Golden 2002a: 21) But, maize
was produced through intensive agriculture. We did not see any cultural
practices among the Aztecs that could provide women a higher status by way of
horticulture. That is why women’s status has been comparatively very week in
Aztec.
Men were expected to serve as
providers and teachers, tending most assiduously to the world outside the
household. Women operated in the domain of the household, weaving, educating
small children, and overseeing the efficient conduct of the family. Children
were expected to show parents respect and obedience (Peters-Golden 2002a:
26-27).
Boys carried water and firewood,
brought goods to market, learned to fish or produce feather crafts. Girls
learned to spin and weave, to cook, and were expected to be proficient at housework.
Formal education was compulsory for boys and girls, although girls generally
attended for a shorter time (Peters-Golden 2002a: 27). Both women and men
served in the priesthood, and infant girls and boys were often dedicated by
their parents at birth. (Fewer women than men remained in the priesthood for
the duration of their lifetime though.) (Peters-Golden 2002a: 32) We see Aztec
women used to have a very limited role in the economy. From above discussion we
can say due to intensive agriculture, Aztec women did not enjoy any special
status in the society.
From the above research, it can be
said that gardening is an important part of Kapauku culture and economy. That
is why Kapauku women got status by gardening sweet potato. On the other hand,
Trobriand women have more tools in their culture that gave them even higher
status than that of Kapauku women. Again I see there is no such tool prevalent
in Aztec culture that could provide an ascribed status for women by the way of
horticulture or gardening like those in Kapauku or Trobriand. Unlike the people
of Kapauku and Trobriand, who are involved in horticulture, Aztecs are engaged
in extensive agriculture. Thus, there are strong evidences that women’s status may
be affected as much as horticulture will be affected by intensive or commercial
agriculture.
Peters-Golden, Holly 2002a The
Aztec: Ancient Legacy, Modern Pride, In Culture Sketches: Case studies in
anthropology. Toronto: McGraw-Hill, pp. 18.
2002b The Kapauku: New Guinea
‘Capitalists?, In Culture Sketches: Case studies in anthropology. Toronto:
McGraw-Hill, pp. 140.
2002c The Trobriand Islanders:
The Power of Exchange, In Culture Sketches: Case studies in anthropology.
Toronto: McGraw-Hill, pp. 248.
No comments:
Post a Comment