Social Hair Author(s): C. R. Hallpike Reviewed work(s): Source: Man, New Series, Vol. 4, No. 2 (Jun., 1969), pp.

256-264 Published by: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2799572 . Accessed: 30/03/2012 04:49
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Man.

http://www.jstor.org

SOCIAL
C. R.

HAIR

HALLPIKE

Dalhousie University

in and these symbolic which inherently acts are appropriate expressing concepts, are found often and havethesame that is whythese this symbols so commonly as Thusthefirst symbols being meaning different in cultures. theory regards ' about' subconscious, the the them 'about' the while second theory regards asbeing world man's and placein it. of is celebrated stimulating and Theobject this of article a re-analysisDr Leach's a of he essay 'Magical hair'(LeachI958) in which advances theory thesymbolic first meaning hair of which ofthe is type. of in between significancesymbolism the the Leachexamines relationship the Dr as Berg,andthe individual subconscious,seenby a psycho-analyst,Charles as The in significancesymbolism socialritual, interpreted ethnographers. of by he is which usesas a basisfordiscussion Berg's particular of symbolism piece between headhairandthe is that hypothesis there a basicsymbolic equivalence such His malegenitals thesubconscious, that in hair-cutting castration. equals of about is how problem to explain theconclusions psycho-analysis thesymbolic as of much in without meaning hair individual of fantasies,a matter fact, though turn in ethnowith what logical empirical or justification, outtobe closely accord ofhair His is the graphers to sayabout significance inritual. conclusionthat have are thepsychologists theethnographers discussing different of and types quite but the and social), that psychologists contrican phenomena subconscious the (the because muchof itscontent designed is to of ritual buteto ourunderstanding our emotions. Phallic to and express, therefore control, potentially dangerous

physical environment, procreation, social role of the sexes,youthand age, the orderand disorder, symbolsand and similarbasic concepts, thereare certain

the A central problem theinterpretation in ofritual the that is fact while partiof cipants eachsociety in maybe unable givean explicit to explanation the and meaning thesymbols of involved, is a large there bodyofsymbols symbolic actswhich common a widevariety cultures, whileanyparticular is to of and we that symbol havea multiplicity may ofmeanings society society, find from to as out, these meanings constantly Forexample, Turner recur. (I966) haspointed and most often inritual, used black very is black, white redarethe colours where and often symbolic dirt rainclouds, ofmilk semen, redofblood. of or white or signification in Given, then, there a number symbols, a common that is of with different cultures,willtry explain basis this I to the of similarity. the Two different hypotheses suggest themselves. first that meanings The is which are ascribed symbols related theworkings thesubconscious, to are to of to the assumed be similar members every to in of culture more and, specifically, of sexual is The mechanisms repression sublimationthe ofthe and impulses. second the of that, given common the concern all societies survival, nature the of with

SOCIAL

HAIR

25

symbolism occurs often ritual in because'ritualmakesexplicit these powerful and of dangerous thoughts Phallicism ritual thusa form cathartic ... in is prophylaxis; it itisnotan expression therepressed of unconscious thecollective of individual, is a social processwhich servesto prevent the individualfrom developingsexual repressions all' (I958: I6I). This may or may not be so; the problemwith at suchtheories to bring is themintosomesortof relationship thefacts, that with so can The wholerelationship they be shownempirically be trueor false. to between occasion private socialsymbolism too complex be considered and is to here;on this a in myimmediate concern to consider particular is symbolic theme, thelightof truethat Leach'spsychological theory, to try determine and to whether is really it in headhaircan be shownto be associated withsexuality a wide rangeof societies if and, moreexplicitly, it is truethat: head= phallus hair= semen haircutting= castration long hair= unrestrained sexuality short hair=restricted sexuality closeshaven hair=celibacy.

and that:

Let us first all consider specialcharacteristicshair. of the of i. Like thenailsit growsconstantly. 2. It can be cut painlessly, againlikethenails. 3. It growsin greatquantity, suchthatindividual hairsare almost numberless. 4. Head hairis apparent infants bothsexesat birth. on of hair in 5. Genital/anal appearsat puberty bothsexes. 6. In someraces, malesdevelopfacialhairafter puberty, also body hair. and 7. Hair on different partsof the body is of different texture, e.g. eyelashes, pubic hair,headhair. 8. In old age hairoften fallsout. turns whiteand/or 9. Hair is a prominent feature animals, of especially monkeys, man'sanalogue in theanimalkingdom. Now thehumanbodyis thefocusof muchritual;and it is notsurprising a that physicalfeature with such manipulative potentialas hair should be used so frequently ritual. in Moreover, view ofitsmanifold in characteristics, I have which just setout,itwouldbe surprisingall itsritual symbolic if and manifestations could be reduced a single to origin. One ofthemostfrequent ritual usesofhairis in association withmourning. On thispointLeach says: 'That hair rituals may have sexual associations been has apparent anthropologists thebeginning, mostly to from but they havenotregarded thisas a matter crucialsignificance. of Tylor,for example,classedritualhairas cutting one " ofan extensive series practices, to various often of due and obscure motives, whichcome underthegeneral headingof ceremonial mutilations." Of other suchpractices mentions he blood-letting thecutting-off finger and of joints. He avoids reference circumcision, the latter to but riteis clearly "ceremonial a mutilation" Whileconceding ritual that does (Tylor I873: 2, 403)' (I958: i5o). not reflect psychological the condition theindividual of performing butrather it,

25 8

C. R. HALLPIKE

requires actor makeformal the to symbolic of that 'thestructure thesocialsituation in kind' (I958: I53), he stillfindsBerg's hypothesis of statements a particular loss of the loved one equals relationto shavingthe head at mourning-that as the of equals loss of hair-to be meaningful explaining genesis the castration by place. Now exactlywhypeople shouldreactto grief in symbolism the first amenableto is themselves undoubtedly shavingofftheirhair and mutilating to reason linkitwithcastration. is but explanation, there noprimafacie psychological but in has Certainly circumcision no suchmeaning, quitethereverse mostprimitive societies.

headhairequals that in weaknesses Berg'shypothesis shaving One ofthegreatest as headsin mourning well as men.But what is castration thatwomenshavetheir The notionis sufficiently on earthdoes it mean to talk of 'femalecastration'? Morewho are not psychologists. for bizarre require to some elucidation readers other describe veryfrequently the to over,references shaving head at mourning such as gashingthe face and body. For example,Frazerlists(I923: mutilations societies whichsome in sixty-eight of the 377-83) besides Jews theOld Testament, casewe find every and at form self-mutilation is performed mourning, in almost of of In by laceration. theabsence off that cutting ofthehairis accompanied bodily the off thatthecutting assume we why to anyindication thecontrary, should therefore type ofthehairis notsimply particular ofself-mutilation? a We frequently in ethnographical literature hairhas close associations that find thata to with the soul. For example,to refer Frazeragain: 'The Siamesethink dwellsin thehumanhead,of whichit is theguardian or spirit calledkhuan kwun of kind;hencethe from injury every protected be must carefully spirit. The spirit (1922: withmanyceremonies' the or act of shaving cutting hairis accompanied of to instances show thesacredcharacter thehead 230); and he citesmanyother the and consequently peculiarnatureof head hair.Since the head is the seat of for good reason things, is surely this amongother organs, reasonand thesensory eyes.Leach seat that recognising it is a mostappropriate of thesoul,in primitive as of howeverthat'The " soul stuff" suchwriters Huttonand Wilken concludes (I958: from is notperhaps verydifferent the"libido" ofthepsycho-analysts' 5o). demondifferentrequire to considerable but Not perhaps different, sufficiently very whichwe are not given. stration similarity, of ritualuse of hair,whichis treated, familiar along withnail Magic is another as from whosebody equalto theperson secretions, symbolically and parings bodily theycame. Of thisLeach says:
catewiththeinnerfeelings the individual, of The psycho-analyst, beingconcerned of whichcutawaypartof theindividual's equivalents bodyas symbolic all gorizes actions ritual thatthese actshaveemotional forcefortheindividual He 'castration'. thenargues of In to the becausetheyare in factfelt be a repression libidinous energy. contrast, social and-he withthepublicly status socialpersons, of is concerned acknowledged anthropologist in are acts the notesthat ritual in whichpartof theindividual's bodyis cutoff prominent ... well 'circumcision'. socialanthropologist's The rites depassageHe might labelall suchrites so shouldbe emotionally of charged explanation why ritesof 'circumcision', defined, converts symbolinto a 'collectiverethe The ritualsituation comesfromDurkheim. the and Durkof presentation' God andSociety...Thesetwoarguments, psycho-analytic the are We them to contrasted, they notcontradictory. canaccept yet heimian, appear be sharply witha third borrowed from to Frazer, theeffect bothsimultaneously argument, together

SOCIAL

HAIR

25 9

from individuals ritual in that magical powertypically in which detached are resides objects de situations-e.g. blood,hair, parings, ofpersons the involved rites passage. in We nail etc. all to that cannot simply merge these three arguments, ifwe recognize they refer 'the but samething', then areledto conclude we as thatmagical potency, regarded a social category, is is something whichinheres 'circumcision' in symbols, but thatsuch symbolization to effective because eachindividual ritual for is "castration" the situation felt signify (I958:
162).

it to Originally, will be remembered, Leach was concerned show thatBerg's ethnoin certain equationof head hair equals genitals was relevant explaining graphical facts, now we have gone farbeyondthisand are beingaskedto but cut fromthebody has a sexualsignificancebelievethateverything or removed castration. if blood and body dirtas used in magic and ritual But specifically, and symbolise castration, personalnames, garments, do foot-prints shadows, in In of castration? fact, course, whichare veryprominent magic,also symbolise of there a muchsimpler is explanation whyhair,nailsand blood,etc. are usedin basisto symbolise personfromwhom theywere the magic on a parspro toto is and a In taken. thefirst place,hairandnailsgrowconstantly this surely very good endowedwithvitality; blood reason whytheyshouldbe believedto be specially to in are of for and semen, different reasons, alsobelieved be sources vitality primicannotapplyto body dirtor nasalmucus, But tivethought. theseconsiderations namesand garments. primitive In we less andstill to foot-prints, shadows, thought of find that the personis thoughtof as having extensions, which frequently shadowsand foot-prints examples.It are personalnames,personalbelongings, that are as of seems likely, therefore, there two reasons whyhairis chosen a symbol in with thewholeperson magic.It is endowed excellence vitality mayhave par (and associations withthesoul if it has come fromthehead) and it also fallsintothe of of widercategory extensions theperson. I have triedto demonstrate of So farin thisarticle something themultiplicity For it ofhairin itsritual of aspects. example, can be thought as associated withthe the becauseit grows;it mayfigure soul,through head,as havinginherent vitality of and in thegeneral characteristics make category bodilymutilations; itsphysical for like it veryappropriate, dress, expressing in changesor differences ritualor of social status. There is thusno reasonwhy a theory hair in ritualshouldbe to reduceall the manifestations hair to a singleorigin-symbolic of obliged It castration. is only when we realisethatthe ritualuses of hair are of widely to differing typesthatwe can attempt explainany of them.But Leach's theory to but not onlytries providea singleexplanation, founders three on stubbornly facts. empirical is The first one to whichI have already referred. is thatwomen'shair,as This is the well as men's, frequently focusof ritual attention. secondis that head The if hairequalsmalegenitals, is little whyis it that comparatively regard paid to beards As in ritual contexts? I remarked head hairis commonto bothsexesand earlier, at is present birth, while the facialhair only developsin the male at puberty. in the has to Moreover, texture latter moreresemblance pubichairthanto head in wereanyplausibility thetheory headhairequalsmalegenitals, that hair.Ifthere hair equals castration, would expect beardsto be more and thatcutting one than prominent headhairin ritual;so it is surely strange in factbeards that havea

260

C. R. HALLPIKE

minorrole,evenallowingforthefactthatin someracesmalesdo comparatively is defect one to which and mostserious not developmuchfacialhair.The third commonly have long hair. I have not so faralluded.This is thefactthatascetics sexuality; longhairequalsunrestrained to according theequations: Now ofcourse, close shavenhairequals celibacy;thisis all sexuality; short hairequals restricted in wrong.Leach of courseis awareof theproblem;but his solution, so faras he adequate. advances one,is farfrom and from socialobligation He quotesIyeras follows:'The sannyasin's freedom but by hisfinal renunciation thesex lifeis symbolised changeof dress above all of to he to According themode of asceticism intends pursue by changeof hairstyle. tuft hairis an essential of of his a sannyasin either shavesoff tuft hair[theisolated it mark of the male Brahmin]or else neglects altogether, social identification the and allowingit to grow matted lousy' (Leach I958: I56). Berg explains long hair of the hairas follows:'Fakirssimply ignorealtogether veryexistence their It organs). growsinto of to the tendency ignore existence thegenital (cf theascetic torment a matted mass lice-inhabited and maybe as mucha sourceofunremitting to it as theneglected penisitselfApparently is not permitted existas faras conis sciousness concerned'(Leach I958: I56). Leach pointsout thatfarfromthe hair 'The correct prescribed, it behaviour beingcompulsive, is socially sannyasin's Upanibehaviour of Indianascetics all laid downin theNaradaparivrajaka was ... the tuft "means" sexualrestraint, shavenhead "means" Brahminthe tonsured from sexualpassions' the and head" means"totaldetachment celibacy thematted that is explanation ofcoursequiteopposedto thetheory long (i958: i56). But this sexuality. hairequalsunrestrained Empire passagein Gibbon'sDeclineandfall of theRoman There is a striking to relating long hairand asceticism.
and the a intotwoclasses; Coenobites, livedunder common who 'The monks weredivided fanaticism. their independent unsocial, who discipline; theAnachorets, indulged and regular the of renounced convent, brethren, The mostdevout, themostambitious thespiritual or of incumbrance dress theycontempthe as theyhad renounced world... All superfluous havebeen whosenaked bodies saints bothsexes of admired, and castaway; somesavage tuously to themselves therudeand to wereonlycovered their long hair.Theyaspired reduce by is brute scarcely above animals; state the distinguished hiskindred miserable in which human their humble of namefromtheir derived practice and the numerous of Anachorets sect the herd. in withthecommon usurped denofsomewildbeast Theyoften grazing thefields to Hermits supposed havepassed are ... whomthey affected resemble; The most to perfect without and without speaking...' without years sleep, many food, many nights days many
(I960: 5i6).

shad over2,000 years ago' (I958:

I56).

'For the But he agrees withBergthat

I This illustrates well thehypothesis wish to advancein thisarticle:that very of with being outsidesocietyand thatthe cutting hair long hairis associated regime or disciplinary society, livingundera particular re-entering symbolises or society partially whollyandI am one within society. course, maybe outside Of and outcasts. By not suggesting thatlong hair is appropriate only to hermits and the of being'outsidesociety'I do not meantherefore totalexclusion ascetics of or an of similar but categories, rather attitude condition rejection whichthe is or of or, asceticism the anchorite sannyasin theultimate expression, again,the of of traits suchas spiritual powerby reason whichthepossessor possession certain

SOCIAL

HAIR

26I

is notfully amenable socialcontrol. be moreprecise, would formulate to To I the as theory 'cutting hairequals socialcontrol'.Dressingthehairmay also be the it. ceremonially equivalent cutting to The tonsure themonkis a familiar of of aspect Christian religious to which life, Leachrefers andwhichat first briefly seems support theory to sight the (I958: I54) that shaven three headequalscelibacy. themonktakes But vows,ofwhichchastity is onlyone; theothers poverty are and obedience. monkin factis underdisThe as cipline, of socialtype. The anchorite, Gibbon'squotaideally a mostrigorously tionmakes is no and very clear, under socialdiscipline whatsoever indeed represents rejection social controlin its most extreme of degree; yet he, like the monk, abstains The monk,of course, not theonlyperson is fromthelustsof theflesh. underthediscipline institutional who hashishaircutshort. The soldier of life and the convictare otherwell known examples, but nobody would supposethat soldiers ideally are from intended refrain to sexualrelations, ifconvicts, even having by reason their of circumstances, in practice are of deprived sex.Thusthecropped heador tonsure all three in are casesofmonk, soldier convict and that signifies they underdiscipline. By contrast these to groups, mayconsider we three categories person of who are, in Western society, generally credited withlong hair-intellectuals, juvenilerebels against society women.It is notdifficult seethat various and in to waysthey or are, are thought be, in somerespects subject socialcontrol to less thantheaverage to man.The intellectual someone is from the who is,byreason hisinterests, of remote concerns everyday or evenpositively of and life, hostile and critical society; to of enough beenwritten has about'hippies'to makeanyexplanation their of longhair somewhat superfluous. thecaseofwomenperhaps But needsa little moreelucidation.In thefirst place,theyare traditionally and concerned withdomestic affairs not withtherunning society a whole,and secondly, of as they have alwaysbeen considered be more governedby theiremotions, to more whimsical and less predictable thanmen. (Whether truly falsely besidethe point-it is stilla or is widelyheldsocialstereotype.) is of coursetruethatin pastcenturies have It men wornlonghair, in suchperiods but women'shairhasbeenevenlonger;at theend of the eighteenth century was not considered it unmanlyfor men to weep but is publicly, there no indication theyoutdidwomenin thisrespect. that Long hairis therefore, I suggest, symbol beingin someway outside a of society, of havinglessto do withit, or of beinglessamenable socialcontrol to thanthe averagecitizen. But themeansby whichone attains condition of course this are various.Anchorites, witches, intellectuals, hippies and women all have long hair, butthere no single is quality whichthey havein commonbesides negative the one of beingpartially whollyoutsidesociety. or Thereis howeverone characteristic whichis often associated withbeingoutsidesociety, whatever for reason:thisis animality. Gibbon's in irony delights emphasising menintheir how search holiness for come to resemble beasts, whileI am notsuggesting therelationship the and that between spiritual powerand beastliness morethanoutward analogical, is nevertheis and it lessa striking resemblance. Thereis considerable evidence fact an association in for of 'outside societyequals hairiness equals animality'. The animalfamiliars of witches thewild beasts and overwhichtheEgyptian saints suchpower,come had

262

C. R. HALLPIKE

place an give societies animals important Mostprimitive connexion. to mindin this before nature the symbolise chaosof untamed and cosmologies theyoften in their heroDribiduof theLugbaraas described The of theprocess socialisation. culture 'They [thetwo cultureassociation. of by Middleton (I960) is a good example this one" sincehe werenothumanas menarenow; Dribidumeans" thehairy heroes] " withlonghairovermostofhisbody.He is alsoknownas " Banyale was covered out and until was discovered driven of he he of (" eater men"),since atehischildren homeon theeastbankoftheNile. . .' (I960: 23 I) '.. . In our own terms hisearlier the and after heroesis betweenthetwo periodsbefore differences thesignificant humanbeings,who behavedas were ordinary the thatin thelatter personages they of people behave now, and were members clans,whereasin the former were in and manner livedinisolation, a worldin whichthere in behaved a contrary no clans'(I960: 233). for but for support myhypothesis, little Leach's. considerable The Bibleprovides a Jacob, herdsman,whilehisbrother was of Esau, thehunter wild beasts, a hairy for was in man dwelling tents, a smoothman.Esau also sold his birthright food and fromleprosy that it (Genesis:25, 23-27). In Leviticus is prescribed a sufferer in ready to be reincorporated an therefore outcast,when cured and thereby who sepshallshaveoffall his hair(Leviticus:14, 8, 9). The Nazarites, society, the hairuntil end allowedto cuttheir unto themselves theLord,werenever arated shaved offat the tabernacle when the hair was formally of theirseparation, (Numbers:6, I-I8). In the Book ofjudges we are told thatSamson'sstrength man(Judges: he in resided hishair,and whenhe is shorn is as weak as anyother and of of clearexample theassociation hairiness the very is madean outcast another men, from ' in society thestateof nature: ... and he was driven from separation as oxen, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven,till and did eat grass and hishairsweregrownlike eagles'feathers, hisnailslikebirds'claws' (Daniel: the Elijah andJohn Baptist, that 4, 33). It maybe significant two majorprophets, of In and animalclothing. a discussion St Paul's with hairiness are associated W. headsin church, F. Howard says:'It may to injunction womento covertheir Rabbinical showfrom So Stack& Billerbeck authority. be a signof thehusband's headas a withuncovered procession walkedin thewedding thatthebride sources was authority Then, as a signthather husband's tokenof herfreemaidenhood. woman shouldalwaysappear thatthe married usage required Jewish upon her, that withherheadcovered'(Howard 1929: I Cor. 2, 3). I shouldemphasise I have in of theseBiblicalexamples orderto prove a in not been partial my selection the point. On the contrary, examplesare a completelist of everysignificant of mentionof hair,exceptthosepassagesdealingwith the cutting-off hair in discussed. of an mourning, aspect hairalready between long hair,or associations the provides following The Bible therefore cutting hair,and socialattributes: the (Esau) hunter hairiness= (Nebuchadnezzar) wild beasts hairiness= (Samson) strength physical hairiness= JohntheBaptist) power(Elijah, spiritual asceticism, hairiness=
I6,
I7-I9).

and was of The description howKingNebuchadnezzar overthrown

SOCIAL

HAIR

263

growing long hair= separation from society God (Nazarites) to whenlepers cured) are shaving hair= rejoining society (Nazarites, of covering hair= discipline (women's acceptance husbands'authority). it The onlymarginal case amongtheseis thatof Samson,in thattakenby itself But could be citedas evidence theassociation head hairand sexuality. it fits of of equallywell withmy hypothesis. considerable Stith-Thompson's Motif-index literature offolk (I955-8) alsoprovides instances of support my hypothesis, littleforLeach's. There are twenty for and suchas fairies, hairiness or beings, beingassociated withsupernatural half-human sevenassociations dwarfs, giants, waterand wood spirits, devilsand mermaids; withwitches;threeassociawithanimal-human relationships; threeassociations tionswithvegetable-human sevenassociations withthesoul or vitality; relations; to andsixwithasceticism. haveconsulted (I onlythereferences 'hair' and 'hairy'.) withsexuality, though Therewereno clearreferences headhairin association to Leach might disagree withme. One could go on producing confirmatory data, but it seemsto me thatthe association cited so faris ampleconfirmation thereis no frequent that evidence of of head hair and the male genitals. The chiefdeficiency Leach's hypothesis he rangeoffacts than leadsus to however notthat applies a muchnarrower is it to associated with is suppose, thaton itsown ground, but wheresocialstatus overtly hairand withsex,itfails provideanyexplanation whylonghairis associated to of with withascetics and with men like Samson,and why shorthairis associated monksand soldiers. that account My primary objection Leach'stheory to therefore simply it takes is of veryfewof thefacts. weakness histheory, in But there a morefundamental is When an anthropologist is whichit shares with all suchpsychological theories. he himself trying understand rituals an alien culture does not concern to the of of indeed, withwhatthesymbols standforin thesubconscious each participant; he has no meansof knowing will He this. mode of analysis be two-fold. will His askthenatives eliciting satisfactory a whateachsymbol means(without necessarily answer)and make a listof theoccurrences each symbolin its ritualcontext. of When he has collectedsufficient of thistype he will tryto discernthe data structure the symbolism of and its relationto the people's cosmology,social is paperon organisation values.A good exampleof thisprocedure Turner's and the symbols passage Ndembu circumcision of in ritual (TurnerI962). Of course, successof the interpretation dependon the qualityof the anthropologist's will themselves. But intelligence, imagination training; facts and the cannotinterpret thepointI am making thatonce theanthropologist discerned structure has the is of the symbolism the culture is investigating, work is complete.The his in he is is in structure there the symbolism, as the structure there a language in just analysed thelinguist. by The advantage treating than'about' of symbolism 'about' theworld,rather as thesubconscious thattherelations and is between symbols theworldare empiridifferent explanations a of callyverifiable, itis accordingly and possible evaluate to Thus the particular piece of symbolism terms how well theyfitthefacts. in of is advantage my theory of thatcutting hair equals social control thatit can be

264

C. R. HALLPIKE

appliedfairly rigorously thelogic of socialsituations whichhairis symbolito in callysignificant. other In words, do nothave to ask ourselves: we 'What is going on in the mindsof people who cut offtheir hairafter beingcuredof leprosy?' minds (quitepossibly nothing all is goingon in their at beyondtheacceptance a of socialrule);we simply consider structural the form theevidence. of Withpsychologicaltheories suchas Leach's,however, cannotrelatea people'ssymbolism we to thefacts their and but of natural environment their society, onlyto one of an indefinite number theories of aboutthesubconscious. to of it Methodologically, therefore, seemssounder tryfirst all to see if social and a symbolism be explained relation society thephysical can in to environment, a mode of analysis with fewerconceptualproblemsand which permits high haveto fallback If fails then will perforce we degree empirical of verification. this on theresources psychology. of

REFERENCES

J. Frazer, G.
I923.

Chatto & Windus. Bible (eds) In Howard, W. F. I929. Ist and 2nd Corinthians. Abingdon commentary F. C. Eiserlen etal. London: Epworth Press. Inst. Leach, E. R. I958. Magical hair.J. R. anthrop. 88, I47-64. London: Oxford Univ. Press. religion. Middleton,J. i96o. Lugbara Copenhagen: Rosenkilde & Bagger. offolk literature. index J. Stith-Thompson, i955-8. Motif on ritual.In Essays the in Turner,V. W. I962. Three symbolsofpassage Ndembu circumcision (ed.) ritual social of relations Max Gluckman. Manchester:Univ. Press. to study approachesthe in I966. Colour classification Ndembu ritual.In Anthropological (ed.) ofreligion M. Banton. (Ass. social Anthrop. Monogr. 3). London: Tavistock Publications. 2 culturevols. London. Tylor, E. B. I873. Primitive

bough (abridgededn). London: Macmillan. Thegolden in (abridged edn). London: Macmillan. Folklore theOld Testament by of Roman empire (abridgement D. M. Low). Londoii: andfall the Gibbon,E. I960. Thedecline
I922.