Recent History of Mekeo Society

Belshaw, Cyril S.

doi:10.1002/j.1834-4461.1951.tb00541.x

Cited by 16 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Culturally, the repertoire of North Mekeo social institutions is nearly identical with that of the more numerous Central Mekeo peoples living to the south and southeast along the Angabunga River, originally described by Seligmann (1910) and Guis (1936), and more recently studied by Belshaw (1951), Hau'ofa (1981), Stephen (1974) andBergendorfl' (1996;cf, Mosko 1997cf, Mosko , 1998. According to this scheme, in the past tribes were composed of patrimoieties, each of which was divided into dispersed patrilineal clans.…”

Section: Ethnographic Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 76%

Syncretic Persons: Sociality, Agency and Personhood in Recent Charismatic Ritual Practices among North Mekeo (PNG)

Mosko

2001

Australian J of Anthropology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Ethnographic Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 76%

Syncretic Persons: Sociality, Agency and Personhood in Recent Charismatic Ritual Practices among North Mekeo (PNG)

Mosko

2001

Australian J of Anthropology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…But it remains curious that, given all the research that has been conducted among Mekeo and Roro since Seligmann's time (e.g. Guis 1936;Egidi 1912;Dupeyrat 1935;Belshaw 1951;Hau'ofa 1971Hau'ofa , 1981Stephen 1974Stephen , 1995Monsell-Davis 1981;Mosko 1985;Bergendorff 1996), no subsequent investigator as far as I know has yet addressed the categories auafangai and kangakanga except by way of the briefest passing allusion.…”

Section: Agent Imentioning

confidence: 99%

Totem and Transaction: the Objectification of ‘Tradition’ Among North Mekeo

Mosko

2002

Oceania

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most recent treatments of Melanesian post‐contact change have presumed that objectifications of ‘culture’ and ‘tradition’ have intensified and proliferated in response to the forces of colonialism and the penetration of the nation‐state. Harrison (2000) has recently argued, however, that in pre‐colonial times too Melanesians characteristically objectified their cultural practices and identities as ‘possessions’ that could be readily exchanged or transacted. Supposedly, the key difference between the two eras has accorded with different formulations of ‘property’: ‘private property’ and the logic of ‘possessive individualism’ in the post‐contact era; and ‘trading and gift‐exchange systems’ or ‘prestige economies’ in pre‐contact times. In this article I examine Harrison's portrayal of Melanesian cultural practices as ‘possessions’ and the notions of ‘property’ that he sees as key to the cultural objectification in both pre‐ and post‐colonial settings with reference to ethnographic and historical information regarding the North Mekeo peoples of Papua New Guinea. I argue from the perspective of the New Melanesian Ethnography that Harrison's view of pre‐contact prestige economies and trade and gift exchange systems retains several misleading a priori assumptions about ‘commodity exchange’ and, illustrating the potential of the New Melanesian Ethnography for historical applications, that he overemphasizes the extent to which post‐contact changes in cultural objectification have involved individualised and commodified forms of property. Consequently, in the case of North Mekeo, both the continuities and the changes between pre‐ and post‐contact cultural objectifications may have proceeded differently from the ways Harrison has outlined for Melanesia generally.

show abstract

“…But it is difficult to see how breaches of exogamy can either create this wider integration or be interpreted as attempts to copy European behaviour. Such breaches have occurred in the Naked Cult on Santo (Guiart, 1956;Miller, 1948), the Mekeo Cult (Belshaw, 1951), and the cult in the Namatanai subdistrict of New Ireland (Territory of New Guinea, 1937-8 : 30), where changes from lincage or clan exogamy to endogamy took…”

Section: Cargo Cults In the Admiralty Islandsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cargo Cults and Systems of Exchange in Melanesia

Brunton

2010

Mankind

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent History of Mekeo Society

Cited by 16 publications

References 0 publications

Syncretic Persons: Sociality, Agency and Personhood in Recent Charismatic Ritual Practices among North Mekeo (PNG)

Syncretic Persons: Sociality, Agency and Personhood in Recent Charismatic Ritual Practices among North Mekeo (PNG)

Totem and Transaction: the Objectification of ‘Tradition’ Among North Mekeo

Cargo Cults and Systems of Exchange in Melanesia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About