1028 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [ 75,19731

561). The situation was further made notes, chapter references. SwCrs34
ambiguous by the differing approaches of (paper). 1
the State, the local authorities, and the
Reviewed by DON HANDELMAN
clergy to the care of the elderly, the poor, The Hebrew University
and other highly dependent persons. Fre-
quently, the basis of witchcraft accusations This slim collection of thirteen reprints
was the failure of persons t o meet their appears to be intended as a set of supple-
moral obligations of practical aid to others, mentary readings for a course in the anthro-
and thus to fail to adhere to the normative pology of religion. The volume is clearly not
basis of social relationships in the com- intended as a textbook, for it lacks any
munity. The accuser could then well believe stated theoretical foci which might connect
that the accused bore him a justifiable the contents, and it does not contain the
grudge, and that it was the accuser who minimal requisites of a reader: not an
initially was morally in the wrong. In the editor’s introduction, sub-sections, explana-
rapidly changing economic and social condi- tions of texts, nor an index.
tions of the time “witch-beliefs helped to This collection can have little interest for
uphold the traditional obligations of charity North American readers since ten of the
and neighborliness at a time when other selections were first published in leading
social and economic forces were conspiring American and English journals and are easily
to weaken them. The fear of retaliation by accessible; and ten of the selections were
witchcraft, was a powerful deterrent against published since 1960. The more valuable
breaking the old moral code” (p. 564). papers in the collection include Rappaport
Thomas traces the subsequent decline of on the effects of ritual on the Tsembaga
witchcraft prosecutions to the changing ecosystem, Peel on the spread of Christianity
intellectual positions of the educated classes in Yorubaland, Collins’ description of
who controlled the courts of law, and who peyote ritualism in Taos pueblo, and Spiro,
were influenced in the long run by the Nash, and Reynolds on Burmese and Laotian
material philosophers. He notes that witch- Buddhism.
craft accusations on the local level also In short, I see no purpose in reviewing
began to dwindle by the later seventeenth volumes of this kind in the pages of the
century as the social strains which developed American Anthropologist; and perhaps the
from the conflict between charity and indi- Editor might give thought to instituting
vidualism were resolved through the full screening procedures to include for review
deployment of the national Poor Law which only volumes which contain some minimal
lessened the tensions and guilts which internal organization to mark them as books
emerged from the social relationships of the with wider interest than that of a particular
poor and those who were better off. university or specific course.
Thomas’ skillful presentation of a wealth
of source materials, his meticulous marshall-
ing of evidence, and his sensible functional- Archaic Roman Religion: With an Appendix
ism in fluently weaving the interdepen- on the Religion, of the Etruscans.
dencies and tensions between religion and GEORGES DUMEZIL. Philip Krapp,
systems of magical belief makes this work trans. Foreword by Mircea Eliade.
something of a landmark among works of Chicago & London: University of Chicago
social history which are of significance to Press, 1970. xxx + 715 pp., illustration,
the anthropologist. The book is a pleasure to appendix, index. $25.00 (cloth). [Two
read and is an intellectual achievement of volumes. Originally published as La Reli-
the first order which deserves to be widely gion romaine archaique suivi d’un ap-
circulated and discussed. pendice sur la religion des Etrusques,
1966.1
Reviewed by RICHARD A. BARRETT
Religion and Society: Papers on Cultural University of New Mexico
Anthropology. OLOF PETTERSON, ed.
Lund: Studentlitteratur, 1970. 213 pp., This book is the English translation of the
figures, map, photographs, tables, chapter original French edition which appeared in
 RELIGION 1029

1966. As such it is something of a landmark: never realized and remains the weakest part
this and The Destiny of the Warrior are the of the study.
first major works by this distinguished The two volumes are divided into five
Indo-European scholar to be published in sections plus the appendix on Etruscan
English. As Mircea Eliade points out in the religion. In the first lengthy (138 pages)
foreword, it is ironic that the first English section entitled “Preliminary Remarks,”
translation of one of Dumkzil’s works should DumCzil lays the groundwork for his ap-
appear four years after the publication (in proach. He is concerned here to defend his
English) of Littleton’s anthropological as- general theoretical position which takes the
sessment of Dumizil’s theoretical per- form of criticism of approaches to Roman
spective. Thus the present book fills an religion of certain scholars. He addresses
important need: it will enable those anthro- himself in particular to the theories of those
pologists and folklorists who do not read whom he calls the “primitivists” (e.g., the
French to acquaint themselves firsthand British classicist, H. J. Rose, and others),
with the work of this eminent scholar. who have claimed that Roman religion can
Dumizil has been writing on the subject be fruitfully analyzed in terms of categories
of Roman myth and religion for more than drawn from primitive religions such as mana.
three and a half decades, As an Indo- I recount the argument here because it
Europeanist his primary concern has been provides a characteristic example of
comparative. He has attempted to demon- Dumizil’s reasoning. He tells us that the
strate that the myths of archaic Rome “primitivist” doctrine is totally mistaken
reflect an underlying ideology (summed up because it is based on the postulate that the
in his term “tripartition”) shared by other earliest Romans can be equated with
Indo-European-speaking peoples such as the modern-day primitives (p. 15). This could
Vedic Indians, Iranians, Celts, and ancient not be the case says Dumizil: the earliest
Scandinavians. All of his earlier studies of Romans to settle in Italy were Indo-
Roman mythology have, therefore, focused Europeans possessed of a sophisticated
on those elements which Rome appears to religious and political organization. This is
have inherited from its Indo-European tradi- established, he says, by the fact that they
tion. had a word *rZg- to denote the leader of
In this work Dumizil attempts to do society, related to the Vedic raj[an] and the
more than this. He is also concerned to Celtic rig-. This proves, he maintans, that
present a total picture of Roman religion. they had a developed political organization.
“It is not enough,” says Dumizil, “to He asks,
extract from early Roman religion the pieces How indeed can one suppose that these
which can be explained by the religions of men who had inherited from the past the
other Indo-European peoples” (p. xvi). It is idea as well as the word rex could have
equally important to “establish and reestab- allowed it to fall into disuse and then
lish the continuity between the Indo- have reactivated it, under the same name
European ‘heritage’ and the Roman reality” [p. 16]?
(p. xvi). In essence, he tells us, he will The second section (“The Great Gods of
combine the virtues of two approaches. The the Archaic Triad”) is the central part of the
comparative method will be used to book. It contains Dumizil’s reconstruction
elucidate aspects of Roman religion which of the earliest Roman religion wherein he
are best understood by juxtaposing them to attempts to demonstrate that cults associa-
similar elements of the sister religions of ted with a triumvirate of gods-Jupiter, Mars
other Indo-European speakers. The second and Quirinus-was the core of archaic
approach attempts to understand Roman Roman theology. Briefly, Dumizil maintains
religion in its own terms: as Dumizil that a parent Indo-European society was
expresses it, LLonemust consider Rome and divided into a hierarchy of three domains,
its religion in themselves, for themselves, as a consisting of ruler-priests, warriors, and
whole” (p. xvii). In the opinion of this herder-cultivators. This social division was
reviewer, the two approaches are not satis- projected onto the supernatural plane in the
factorily combined and the latter aim of form of deities concerned with three “func-
presenting Roman religion “as a whole” is tions”: those of sovereignty, physical power,
1030 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [ 75,19731

and fertility. This “ideology of three func- many anthropologists consider equally im-
tions” was to become part of the mythologi- portant: the relationship between religion
cal and religious structures of virtually all and society, the functions of religious belief,
descendant Indo-European-speaking peoples. and the role of the sacred in everyday life.
Dumizil’s effort in this section, therefore, is Some observations of this kind are offered,
to demonstrate that the earliest Romans but they are often so effectively buried in
embraced such an ideology and that it is reams of textual exegesis and academic
represented in the godly triad: Jupiter arguments that I suspect few anthropologists
represents sovereignty, Mars stands for will have the patience to ferret them out.
physical power, and Quirinus is the symbol The task of reading the book is further
of fertility. complicated by the exceptional demands
Because the Roman documentary evi- Dumizil makes of his reader. He assumes
dence is slim on this early period, Dumbzil considerable knowledge of classical civiliza-
relies heavily on comparisons with other tion as well as a reading knowledge of Latin.
Indo-European societies. Thus in the Without this latter skill certain passages in
argument over whether Mars was a warrior the second volume are virtually unintelligible
god or simply a generalized deity closely (cf. pp. 398,425,469,510,590).
associated with agriculture (as some latinists For those of the English reading audience
have maintained), Dumizil makes a com- who want to know what Dumbzil and his
parison with Vedic India to prove the former method are about, this book will be ap-
was the case. He relates the meager known preciated. But for the nonspecialist who
details of a Roman ceremony, the Equus seeks a general treatment of Roman religion,
October, in which a horse was sacrificed to it is almost certain to be a disappointment.
Mars (pp. 215-216).Because we possess so
few details, various interpretations are References Cited
plausible. This is not the case, however, Dumezil, Georges
when we analyze the aivamedha ceremony 1970 The Destiny of the Warrior. Alf
from the Rig Veda which Dumizil considers Hiltebeitel, Trans. Chicago & London:
the Indian “homologue” to the Equus University of Chicago Press.
October. The detailed Indian text shows that Littleton, C. Scott
the aivamedha was a sacrifice by warriors 1966 The New Comparative Mythology:
and was wholly consistent with the warlike An Anthropological Assessment of the
function. Therefore, Dumbzil concludes, the Theories of Georges Dumezil.
Berkeley: University of California
Equus October must have been the same. He Press.
comments on his method:
As happens almost always at Rome, only
the facts are known to us, and those only
schematically, but not the theory which
supported them or had originally done so. The God o f the Matopo Hills: An Essay on
On the other hand, the Indian books the Mwari Cult in Rhodesia. M. L.
comment abundantly on the complete DANEEL. Foreword by J. F. Holleman.
and detailed rituals which they prescribe, Afrika-Studiecentrum Communications,
and often, for homologous rituals, the 1. The Hague: Mouton, 1970 (publication
Indian commentaries allow us to under- date, 1972). 95 pp., diagrams, map,
stand the bare Roman facts as well [p. plates, notes, references. DG9.00 (paper).
2391.
Zionism and Faith-Healing in Rhodesia:
This, then, is the famous “comparative Aspects of African Independent Church-
method” which has, perhaps understand- es. M. L. DANEEL. V. A. February,
ably, provoked so much controversy. trans. Afrika-Studiecentrum Communica-
As an overall treatment of Roman reli- tions, 2. The Hague: Mouton, 1970
gion the book has some serious short- (publication date, 1972). 64 pp., maps,
comings. By far the greatest part of the text plates, notes, references. DG9.00 (paper).
is concerned with interpreting how the
Romans conceptualized particular deities. Reviewed by JAMES L. BRAIN
Much less attention is given to matters which SUNY, New Paltz